"The iPhone is obviously superior at one thing. Ask your wallet."
-WaPo
https://wapo.st/45Ya1CH
Alan Browne quoted:
"The iPhone is obviously superior at one thing. Ask your wallet." https://wapo.st/45Ya1CH
Re-sale value is unimportant to me.
Of all my android phones, I keep the most recent as a viable spare, have given three to family members, one was destroyed by washing machine and
I keep the oldest one for nostalgia reasons.
"The iPhone is obviously superior at one thing. Ask your wallet." https://wapo.st/45Ya1CH
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
Alan Browne quoted:
"The iPhone is obviously superior at one thing. Ask your wallet."
https://wapo.st/45Ya1CH
Re-sale value is unimportant to me.
Of all my android phones, I keep the most recent as a viable spare, have
given three to family members, one was destroyed by washing machine and
I keep the oldest one for nostalgia reasons.
As you say, I think very few people actually resell their old phone.
Some might trade it in, but that's not the same as reselling.
Many (most?) - also iPhone users - will do what you describe.
Anyway, AFAIC, even if the resale/trade-in value of my phone would be zero, the *cost* is still much less than even the cheapest iPhone minus resale/trade-in. So if you'd ask *my* wallet, ...
Apple users here often claim that iPhones are not expensive, by which
they *mean* that in their *perception*, they're good value for money.
However in the real world (and the dictionary), the term 'expensive'
also means 'costs a lot of money'. IME, Android users tend to go by
*both* definitions (of 'not expensive').
On 2023-11-04 08:52, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
Alan Browne quoted:
"The iPhone is obviously superior at one thing. Ask your wallet."
https://wapo.st/45Ya1CH
Re-sale value is unimportant to me.
Of all my android phones, I keep the most recent as a viable spare, have >> given three to family members, one was destroyed by washing machine and
I keep the oldest one for nostalgia reasons.
As you say, I think very few people actually resell their old phone. Some might trade it in, but that's not the same as reselling.
"very few" is a huge underestimate.
Many (most?) - also iPhone users - will do what you describe.
"Many" is a huge overestimate.
Anyway, AFAIC, even if the resale/trade-in value of my phone would be zero, the *cost* is still much less than even the cheapest iPhone minus resale/trade-in. So if you'd ask *my* wallet, ...
Apples and oranges. The comparison is for like spec iPhones v. Android.
You can't compare a value Android to a flagship iPhone (or v-v).
Apple users here often claim that iPhones are not expensive, by which they *mean* that in their *perception*, they're good value for money.
Whoosh - for comparable spec, the prices are similar between iPhone and Android. The main difference is that Apple offer little at the bottom
spec end.
However in the real world (and the dictionary), the term 'expensive' also means 'costs a lot of money'. IME, Android users tend to go by
*both* definitions (of 'not expensive').
Android users can pay just as high for high end phones - and the point
of the article is that Android phones depreciate quicker.
In part because there is a strong secondary market for iPhones -
Android, less.
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
On 2023-11-04 08:52, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
Alan Browne quoted:
"The iPhone is obviously superior at one thing. Ask your wallet."
https://wapo.st/45Ya1CH
Re-sale value is unimportant to me.
Of all my android phones, I keep the most recent as a viable spare, have >>>> given three to family members, one was destroyed by washing machine and >>>> I keep the oldest one for nostalgia reasons.
As you say, I think very few people actually resell their old phone. >>> Some might trade it in, but that's not the same as reselling.
"very few" is a huge underestimate.
Your guess is as good as mine.
Many (most?) - also iPhone users - will do what you describe.
"Many" is a huge overestimate.
Your guess is as good as mine.
Anyway, AFAIC, even if the resale/trade-in value of my phone would be >>> zero, the *cost* is still much less than even the cheapest iPhone minus
resale/trade-in. So if you'd ask *my* wallet, ...
Apples and oranges. The comparison is for like spec iPhones v. Android.
You can't compare a value Android to a flagship iPhone (or v-v).
Nope. That's what Apple fans like to *pretend*, but that's not always
the case. In my case, documented here at the time, the closest iPhone
was twice as expensive, had half the storage and a lower resolution
camera. So it was indeed Apple to orange, because the Apple was *more* expensive for *lesser* specs. Yes, it is just an example, but - as much
as the Apple fans 'hate' it - it's not the only example. So as I said:
*My* wallet says *my* *cost* is lower.
Apple users here often claim that iPhones are not expensive, by which >>> they *mean* that in their *perception*, they're good value for money.
Whoosh - for comparable spec, the prices are similar between iPhone and
Android. The main difference is that Apple offer little at the bottom
spec end.
Whoosh yourself, see above. That's *exactly* the point: What Apple
users *claim*, versus reality. But yes, at the (very) high end, the differences are often relatively smaller.
However in the real world (and the dictionary), the term 'expensive' >>> also means 'costs a lot of money'. IME, Android users tend to go by
*both* definitions (of 'not expensive').
Android users can pay just as high for high end phones - and the point
of the article is that Android phones depreciate quicker.
And - as Andy and I (and others) explain - the "depreciation" is a
rather fictituous concept, because it does affect few people and few
cases. (Again, don't confuse resale with trade-in.)
In part because there is a strong secondary market for iPhones -
Android, less.
Because we just keep using them! :-)
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
On 2023-11-04 08:52, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:have
Alan Browne quoted:
"The iPhone is obviously superior at one thing. Ask your wallet."
https://wapo.st/45Ya1CH
Re-sale value is unimportant to me.
Of all my android phones, I keep the most recent as a viable spare,
andgiven three to family members, one was destroyed by washing machine
phone.I keep the oldest one for nostalgia reasons.
As you say, I think very few people actually resell their old
Some might trade it in, but that's not the same as reselling.
"very few" is a huge underestimate.
Your guess is as good as mine.
Many (most?) - also iPhone users - will do what you describe.
"Many" is a huge overestimate.
Your guess is as good as mine.
Anyway, AFAIC, even if the resale/trade-in value of my phone wouldbe
zero, the *cost* is still much less than even the cheapest iPhoneminus
resale/trade-in. So if you'd ask *my* wallet, ...
Apples and oranges. The comparison is for like spec iPhones v. Android.
You can't compare a value Android to a flagship iPhone (or v-v).
Nope. That's what Apple fans like to *pretend*, but that's not always
the case. In my case, documented here at the time, the closest iPhone
was twice as expensive, had half the storage and a lower resolution
camera. So it was indeed Apple to orange, because the Apple was *more* expensive for *lesser* specs.
Yes, it is just an example, but - as much
as the Apple fans 'hate' it - it's not the only example. So as I said:
*My* wallet says *my* *cost* is lower.
Apple users here often claim that iPhones are not expensive, bywhich
they *mean* that in their *perception*, they're good value for money.
Whoosh - for comparable spec, the prices are similar between iPhone and
Android. The main difference is that Apple offer little at the bottom
spec end.
Whoosh yourself, see above. That's *exactly* the point: What Apple
users *claim*, versus reality. But yes, at the (very) high end, the differences are often relatively smaller.
However in the real world (and the dictionary), the term'expensive'
also means 'costs a lot of money'. IME, Android users tend to go by
*both* definitions (of 'not expensive').
Android users can pay just as high for high end phones - and the point
of the article is that Android phones depreciate quicker.
And - as Andy and I (and others) explain - the "depreciation" is a
rather fictituous concept, because it does affect few people and few
cases. (Again, don't confuse resale with trade-in.)
In part because there is a strong secondary market for iPhones -
Android, less.
Because we just keep using them! :-)
But yes, there is a strong secondary market for iPhones, probably
mainly due to the long support cycle. That might change because Android support cycles are getting much longer (than before) rather quickly.
We'll have to wait and see how that pans out.
On 2023-11-04 12:10, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
On 2023-11-04 08:52, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
Alan Browne quoted:
"The iPhone is obviously superior at one thing. Ask your wallet."
https://wapo.st/45Ya1CH
Re-sale value is unimportant to me.
Of all my android phones, I keep the most recent as a viable spare, have >>>> given three to family members, one was destroyed by washing machine and >>>> I keep the oldest one for nostalgia reasons.
As you say, I think very few people actually resell their old phone. >>> Some might trade it in, but that's not the same as reselling.
"very few" is a huge underestimate.
Your guess is as good as mine.
Many (most?) - also iPhone users - will do what you describe.
"Many" is a huge overestimate.
Your guess is as good as mine.
Your guess is useless.
Fact is people sell or trade in their phones and this is a major
sub-industry in itself.
Anyway, AFAIC, even if the resale/trade-in value of my phone would be >>> zero, the *cost* is still much less than even the cheapest iPhone minus >>> resale/trade-in. So if you'd ask *my* wallet, ...
Apples and oranges. The comparison is for like spec iPhones v. Android. >> You can't compare a value Android to a flagship iPhone (or v-v).
Nope. That's what Apple fans like to *pretend*, but that's not always the case. In my case, documented here at the time, the closest iPhone
was twice as expensive, had half the storage and a lower resolution
camera. So it was indeed Apple to orange, because the Apple was *more* expensive for *lesser* specs. Yes, it is just an example, but - as much
as the Apple fans 'hate' it - it's not the only example. So as I said:
*My* wallet says *my* *cost* is lower.
Yes - this is what Android fans do. Cherry pick a case and pretend it is
the genera case.
Par.
Apple users here often claim that iPhones are not expensive, by which >>> they *mean* that in their *perception*, they're good value for money.
Whoosh - for comparable spec, the prices are similar between iPhone and
Android. The main difference is that Apple offer little at the bottom
spec end.
Whoosh yourself, see above. That's *exactly* the point: What Apple
users *claim*, versus reality. But yes, at the (very) high end, the differences are often relatively smaller.
Not at. Whoosh on you. Comparisons are made where they can be. Where
they can't be it is invalid data.
However in the real world (and the dictionary), the term 'expensive' >>> also means 'costs a lot of money'. IME, Android users tend to go by
*both* definitions (of 'not expensive').
Android users can pay just as high for high end phones - and the point
of the article is that Android phones depreciate quicker.
And - as Andy and I (and others) explain - the "depreciation" is a rather fictituous concept, because it does affect few people and few
cases. (Again, don't confuse resale with trade-in.)
Yes, don't. Go to those who actually do this - centres that re-purpose phones that are traded in (one price level) and the one-to-one market - another level. In both cases, Androids devalue more than iPhones over a given period.
Sad reality.
In part because there is a strong secondary market for iPhones -
Android, less.
Because we just keep using them! :-)
Most people I know keep their iPhones about 5 years. While there remain
the 'junkies' out there who can't go 2 years (sometimes 1), that is
becoming less and less common as the incremental performance is not
worth the cost. (Android or iPhone).
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
On 2023-11-04 12:10, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
On 2023-11-04 08:52, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
Alan Browne quoted:
"The iPhone is obviously superior at one thing. Ask your wallet." >>>>>>> https://wapo.st/45Ya1CH
Re-sale value is unimportant to me.
Of all my android phones, I keep the most recent as a viable spare, have >>>>>> given three to family members, one was destroyed by washing machine and >>>>>> I keep the oldest one for nostalgia reasons.
As you say, I think very few people actually resell their old phone. >>>>> Some might trade it in, but that's not the same as reselling.
"very few" is a huge underestimate.
Your guess is as good as mine.
Many (most?) - also iPhone users - will do what you describe.
"Many" is a huge overestimate.
Your guess is as good as mine.
Your guess is useless.
Fact is people sell or trade in their phones and this is a major
sub-industry in itself.
Trade-in yes, resell not so much. (*Buying* a *refurb* is a different thing alltogether.)
Anyway, AFAIC, even if the resale/trade-in value of my phone would be
zero, the *cost* is still much less than even the cheapest iPhone minus >>>>> resale/trade-in. So if you'd ask *my* wallet, ...
Apples and oranges. The comparison is for like spec iPhones v. Android. >>>> You can't compare a value Android to a flagship iPhone (or v-v).
Nope. That's what Apple fans like to *pretend*, but that's not always >>> the case. In my case, documented here at the time, the closest iPhone
was twice as expensive, had half the storage and a lower resolution
camera. So it was indeed Apple to orange, because the Apple was *more*
expensive for *lesser* specs. Yes, it is just an example, but - as much
as the Apple fans 'hate' it - it's not the only example. So as I said:
*My* wallet says *my* *cost* is lower.
Yes - this is what Android fans do. Cherry pick a case and pretend it is
the genera case.
Its not cherry picking, it's *my* example/case, nothing more, nothing
less. And I didn't say it's the general case, I said it's not the only example. Try to read for comprehension.
Par.
Nope.
Apple users here often claim that iPhones are not expensive, by whichWhoosh - for comparable spec, the prices are similar between iPhone and >>>> Android. The main difference is that Apple offer little at the bottom >>>> spec end.
they *mean* that in their *perception*, they're good value for money. >>>>
Whoosh yourself, see above. That's *exactly* the point: What Apple
users *claim*, versus reality. But yes, at the (very) high end, the
differences are often relatively smaller.
Not at. Whoosh on you. Comparisons are made where they can be. Where
they can't be it is invalid data.
Tell that ("it is invalid data") to your 'mates'.
However in the real world (and the dictionary), the term 'expensive' >>>>> also means 'costs a lot of money'. IME, Android users tend to go by
*both* definitions (of 'not expensive').
Android users can pay just as high for high end phones - and the point >>>> of the article is that Android phones depreciate quicker.
And - as Andy and I (and others) explain - the "depreciation" is a
rather fictituous concept, because it does affect few people and few
cases. (Again, don't confuse resale with trade-in.)
Yes, don't. Go to those who actually do this - centres that re-purpose
phones that are traded in (one price level) and the one-to-one market -
another level. In both cases, Androids devalue more than iPhones over a
given period.
Sad reality.
Earth to Alan: We don't care! When our *cost* is lower, "devaluation"
is irrelevant.
In part because there is a strong secondary market for iPhones -
Android, less.
Because we just keep using them! :-)
Most people I know keep their iPhones about 5 years. While there remain
the 'junkies' out there who can't go 2 years (sometimes 1), that is
becoming less and less common as the incremental performance is not
worth the cost. (Android or iPhone).
At least *that* we can agree on! :-)
AFAIC, EOD. There's just no point.
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
On 2023-11-04 08:52, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
However in the real world (and the dictionary), the term 'expensive' >>> also means 'costs a lot of money'. IME, Android users tend to go by
*both* definitions (of 'not expensive').
Android users can pay just as high for high end phones - and the point
of the article is that Android phones depreciate quicker.
And - as Andy and I (and others) explain - the "depreciation" is a
rather fictituous concept, because it does affect few people and few
cases. (Again, don't confuse resale with trade-in.)
In part because there is a strong secondary market for iPhones -
Android, less.
Because we just keep using them! :-)
But yes, there is a strong secondary market for iPhones, probably
mainly due to the long support cycle. That might change because Android support cycles are getting much longer (than before) rather quickly.
We'll have to wait and see how that pans out.
In part because there is a strong secondary market for iPhones -
Android, less.
Because we just keep using them! :-)
But yes, there is a strong secondary market for iPhones, probably
mainly due to the long support cycle. That might change because Android >support cycles are getting much longer (than before) rather quickly.
We'll have to wait and see how that pans out.
On 2023-11-04 14:14, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
On 2023-11-04 12:10, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
On 2023-11-04 08:52, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
Alan Browne quoted:
"The iPhone is obviously superior at one thing. Ask your wallet." >>>>>>> https://wapo.st/45Ya1CH
Re-sale value is unimportant to me.
Of all my android phones, I keep the most recent as a viable
spare, have given three to family members, one was destroyed by
washing machine and I keep the oldest one for nostalgia
reasons.
As you say, I think very few people actually resell their
old phone. Some might trade it in, but that's not the same as
reselling.
"very few" is a huge underestimate.
Your guess is as good as mine.
Many (most?) - also iPhone users - will do what you describe.
"Many" is a huge overestimate.
Your guess is as good as mine.
Your guess is useless.
Fact is people sell or trade in their phones and this is a major
sub-industry in itself.
Trade-in yes, resell not so much. (*Buying* a *refurb* is a different thing alltogether.)
Muddying the waters (badly). The point of the article was how much the
seller could get for a phone v. what he paid for it.
Period.
Anyway, AFAIC, even if the resale/trade-in value of my
phone would be zero, the *cost* is still much less than even the
cheapest iPhone minus resale/trade-in. So if you'd ask *my*
wallet, ...
Apples and oranges. The comparison is for like spec iPhones v. Android. >>>> You can't compare a value Android to a flagship iPhone (or v-v).
Nope. That's what Apple fans like to *pretend*, but that's not always >>> the case. In my case, documented here at the time, the closest iPhone
was twice as expensive, had half the storage and a lower resolution
camera. So it was indeed Apple to orange, because the Apple was *more* >>> expensive for *lesser* specs. Yes, it is just an example, but - as much >>> as the Apple fans 'hate' it - it's not the only example. So as I said: >>> *My* wallet says *my* *cost* is lower.
Yes - this is what Android fans do. Cherry pick a case and pretend it is >> the genera case.
Its not cherry picking, it's *my* example/case, nothing more, nothing
The essence of cherry picking since you used it as a valid comparison
against a generalized case. Sheesh!
less. And I didn't say it's the general case, I said it's not the only example. Try to read for comprehension.
Don't bother with one-offs in a general comparison.
Earth to Alan: We don't care! When our *cost* is lower, "devaluation"
is irrelevant.
But it isn't across the range - and that is what the article is about,
not your narrow use case.
AFAIC, EOD. There's just no point.
Agreed - except where we disagree!
On 2023-11-04 14:14, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
On 2023-11-04 12:10, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
On 2023-11-04 08:52, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
Alan Browne quoted:
"The iPhone is obviously superior at one thing. Ask your wallet." >>>>>>>> https://wapo.st/45Ya1CH
Re-sale value is unimportant to me.
Of all my android phones, I keep the most recent as a viable spare, have
given three to family members, one was destroyed by washing machine and >>>>>>> I keep the oldest one for nostalgia reasons.
As you say, I think very few people actually resell their old phone.
Some might trade it in, but that's not the same as reselling.
"very few" is a huge underestimate.
Your guess is as good as mine.
Many (most?) - also iPhone users - will do what you describe.
"Many" is a huge overestimate.
Your guess is as good as mine.
Your guess is useless.
Fact is people sell or trade in their phones and this is a major
sub-industry in itself.
Trade-in yes, resell not so much. (*Buying* a *refurb* is a different
thing alltogether.)
Muddying the waters (badly). The point of the article was how much the
seller could get for a phone v. what he paid for it.
Period.
Anyway, AFAIC, even if the resale/trade-in value of my phone would be
zero, the *cost* is still much less than even the cheapest iPhone minus >>>>>> resale/trade-in. So if you'd ask *my* wallet, ...
Apples and oranges. The comparison is for like spec iPhones v. Android. >>>>> You can't compare a value Android to a flagship iPhone (or v-v).
Nope. That's what Apple fans like to *pretend*, but that's not always >>>> the case. In my case, documented here at the time, the closest iPhone
was twice as expensive, had half the storage and a lower resolution
camera. So it was indeed Apple to orange, because the Apple was *more* >>>> expensive for *lesser* specs. Yes, it is just an example, but - as much >>>> as the Apple fans 'hate' it - it's not the only example. So as I said: >>>> *My* wallet says *my* *cost* is lower.
Yes - this is what Android fans do. Cherry pick a case and pretend it is >>> the genera case.
Its not cherry picking, it's *my* example/case, nothing more, nothing
The essence of cherry picking since you used it as a valid comparison
against a generalized case. Sheesh!
less. And I didn't say it's the general case, I said it's not the only
example. Try to read for comprehension.
Don't bother with one-offs in a general comparison.
Par.
Nope.
A lot.
Apple users here often claim that iPhones are not expensive, by whichWhoosh - for comparable spec, the prices are similar between iPhone and >>>>> Android. The main difference is that Apple offer little at the bottom >>>>> spec end.
they *mean* that in their *perception*, they're good value for money. >>>>>
Whoosh yourself, see above. That's *exactly* the point: What Apple >>>> users *claim*, versus reality. But yes, at the (very) high end, the
differences are often relatively smaller.
Not at. Whoosh on you. Comparisons are made where they can be. Where
they can't be it is invalid data.
Tell that ("it is invalid data") to your 'mates'.
Not sure what you're on about.
Point is, for Androids range of quality levels 1..10, Apple only make
phones in the 4 .. 10 range. So, the Androids in the 1..3 range can't
be compared (values above are illustrative).
However in the real world (and the dictionary), the term 'expensive'
also means 'costs a lot of money'. IME, Android users tend to go by >>>>>> *both* definitions (of 'not expensive').
Android users can pay just as high for high end phones - and the point >>>>> of the article is that Android phones depreciate quicker.
And - as Andy and I (and others) explain - the "depreciation" is a >>>> rather fictituous concept, because it does affect few people and few
cases. (Again, don't confuse resale with trade-in.)
Yes, don't. Go to those who actually do this - centres that re-purpose
phones that are traded in (one price level) and the one-to-one market -
another level. In both cases, Androids devalue more than iPhones over a >>> given period.
Sad reality.
Earth to Alan: We don't care! When our *cost* is lower, "devaluation"
is irrelevant.
But it isn't across the range - and that is what the article is about,
not your narrow use case.
In part because there is a strong secondary market for iPhones -
Android, less.
Because we just keep using them! :-)
Most people I know keep their iPhones about 5 years. While there remain >>> the 'junkies' out there who can't go 2 years (sometimes 1), that is
becoming less and less common as the incremental performance is not
worth the cost. (Android or iPhone).
At least *that* we can agree on! :-)
:-)
AFAIC, EOD. There's just no point.
Agreed - except where we disagree!
In comp.mobile.android, on 4 Nov 2023 16:10:18 GMT, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
In part because there is a strong secondary market for iPhones -
Android, less.
Because we just keep using them! :-)
But yes, there is a strong secondary market for iPhones, probably
mainly due to the long support cycle. That might change because Android >support cycles are getting much longer (than before) rather quickly.
We'll have to wait and see how that pans out.
There is suppport for my Android phone!?
[Judst clarifying some loose ends.]
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
Muddying the waters (badly). The point of the article was how much the
seller could get for a phone v. what he paid for it.
Fair enough. I went by the Subject of your post. I don't follow shady looking URLs. If you'd said it was a pointer to a The Washington Post article, I would have gone there.
Alan Browne quoted:
"The iPhone is obviously superior at one thing. Ask your wallet."
https://wapo.st/45Ya1CH
Re-sale value is unimportant to me.
Of all my android phones, I keep the most recent as a viable spare,
have given three to family members, one was destroyed by washing
machine and I keep the oldest one for nostalgia reasons.
On 2023-11-04 21:02, Frank Slootweg wrote:
[Judst clarifying some loose ends.]
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
...
Muddying the waters (badly). The point of the article was how much the
seller could get for a phone v. what he paid for it.
Fair enough. I went by the Subject of your post. I don't follow shady >> looking URLs. If you'd said it was a pointer to a The Washington Post
article, I would have gone there.
Same here.
In comp.mobile.android, on 4 Nov 2023 16:10:18 GMT, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
In part because there is a strong secondary market for iPhones -
Android, less.
Because we just keep using them! :-)
But yes, there is a strong secondary market for iPhones, probably
mainly due to the long support cycle. That might change because Android
support cycles are getting much longer (than before) rather quickly.
We'll have to wait and see how that pans out.
There is suppport for my Android phone!?
On 2023-11-04 12:19:51 +0000, Andy Burns said:
Alan Browne quoted:
"The iPhone is obviously superior at one thing. Ask your wallet."
https://wapo.st/45Ya1CH
Re-sale value is unimportant to me.
Of all my android phones, I keep the most recent as a viable spare,
have given three to family members, one was destroyed by washing
machine and I keep the oldest one for nostalgia reasons.
If you keep them sealed in the box, then you might get a lot more
"resale value" for them. :-)
An Original, Factory-Sealed, 4GB iPhone
Just Sold at Auction for Over US$190,000
<https://gizmodo.com/original-sealed-iphone-sells-auction-190-000-dollars-1850647037>
On 11/4/23 2:11 PM, Your Name wrote:
On 2023-11-04 12:19:51 +0000, Andy Burns said:
Alan Browne quoted:
"The iPhone is obviously superior at one thing. Ask your wallet."
https://wapo.st/45Ya1CH
Re-sale value is unimportant to me.
Of all my android phones, I keep the most recent as a viable spare,
have given three to family members, one was destroyed by washing
machine and I keep the oldest one for nostalgia reasons.
If you keep them sealed in the box, then you might get a lot more
"resale value" for them. :-)
Not necessarily. I have two genuine Xerox acoustic modems unused in
their original boxes which I doubt have any value at all.
On 2023-11-04 16:22, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-04 21:02, Frank Slootweg wrote:
[Judst clarifying some loose ends.]
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
...
Muddying the waters (badly). The point of the article was how much the >>>> seller could get for a phone v. what he paid for it.
Fair enough. I went by the Subject of your post. I don't follow shady >>> looking URLs. If you'd said it was a pointer to a The Washington Post
article, I would have gone there.
Same here.
"WaPo" has been shorthand for The Washington Post since ... well a long freaking time.
On 2023-11-04 21:38, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-11-04 16:22, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-04 21:02, Frank Slootweg wrote:
[Judst clarifying some loose ends.]
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
...
Muddying the waters (badly). The point of the article was how much the >>>>> seller could get for a phone v. what he paid for it.
Fair enough. I went by the Subject of your post. I don't follow shady >>>> looking URLs. If you'd said it was a pointer to a The Washington Post
article, I would have gone there.
Same here.
"WaPo" has been shorthand for The Washington Post since ... well a long
freaking time.
And I should know that because... ?
"WaPo" has been shorthand for The Washington Post since ... well a long freaking time.
On 11/4/23 3:00 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-04 21:38, Alan Browne wrote:
"WaPo" has been shorthand for The Washington Post since ... well a
long freaking time.
And I should know that because... ?
:-)
It's a well-known abbreviation all over the world. I thought that ALL literate people knew that.
<sigh> They did bring down (Woodward &
Bernstein), with Judge Sirica's help, of course, our President Nixon.
A cool thing -- we actually met Sirica in his office a few days after
Nixon resigned. Nice guy.
But yes, there is a strong secondary market for iPhones, probably
mainly due to the long support cycle.
Whoosh - for comparable spec, the prices are similar between iPhone and Android. The main difference is that Apple offer little at the bottom
spec end.
"WaPo" has been shorthand for The Washington Post since ... well a long
freaking time.
But that's only clear *after* you've gone there, before that who knows
where it'll lead?
On 11/4/23 2:11 PM, Your Name wrote:
On 2023-11-04 12:19:51 +0000, Andy Burns said:
Alan Browne quoted:
"The iPhone is obviously superior at one thing. Ask your wallet."
https://wapo.st/45Ya1CH
Re-sale value is unimportant to me.
Of all my android phones, I keep the most recent as a viable spare,
have given three to family members, one was destroyed by washing
machine and I keep the oldest one for nostalgia reasons.
If you keep them sealed in the box, then you might get a lot more
"resale value" for them. :-)
Not necessarily. I have two genuine Xerox acoustic modems unused in
their original boxes which I doubt have any value at all.
An Original, Factory-Sealed, 4GB iPhone
Just Sold at Auction for Over US$190,000
<https://gizmodo.com/original-sealed-iphone-sells-auction-190-000-dollars-1850647037>
Even if the makers still support the OS (which despite claims is not
true for old versions of Android either), the phone companies don't
keep supporting them forever - 3G networks are being turned off, 4G and
5G networks will also eventually be turned off as newer systems come
along. Your device may well still work, but it will be useless as a
phone / text-messenger.
Do you actually resale your phone or does it go in the drawer as a spare?
Im leery of buying used phones unless theyre coming from someone I know. And the times I do buy a phone its because the one I have is broken or too old. They end up in the drawer or given to recycle programs. I guess some people buy a new phone every year just to boast about it.
"The iPhone is obviously superior at one thing. Ask your wallet."
-WaPo
https://wapo.st/45Ya1CH
On 11/4/23 3:00 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-04 21:38, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-11-04 16:22, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-04 21:02, Frank Slootweg wrote:
[Judst clarifying some loose ends.]
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
...
Muddying the waters (badly). The point of the article was how much >>>>>> the
seller could get for a phone v. what he paid for it.
Fair enough. I went by the Subject of your post. I don't follow >>>>> shady
looking URLs. If you'd said it was a pointer to a The Washington Post >>>>> article, I would have gone there.
Same here.
"WaPo" has been shorthand for The Washington Post since ... well a
long freaking time.
And I should know that because... ?
:-)
It's a well-known abbreviation all over the world. I thought that ALL literate people knew that. <sigh> They did bring down (Woodward & Bernstein), with Judge Sirica's help, of course, our President Nixon.
A cool thing -- we actually met Sirica in his office a few days after
Nixon resigned. Nice guy.
On 2023-11-04 23:52, The Real Bev wrote:
On 11/4/23 3:00 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-04 21:38, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-11-04 16:22, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-04 21:02, Frank Slootweg wrote:
[Judst clarifying some loose ends.]
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
...
Muddying the waters (badly). The point of the article was how much >>>>>>> the
seller could get for a phone v. what he paid for it.
Fair enough. I went by the Subject of your post. I don't follow >>>>>> shady
looking URLs. If you'd said it was a pointer to a The Washington Post >>>>>> article, I would have gone there.
Same here.
"WaPo" has been shorthand for The Washington Post since ... well a
long freaking time.
And I should know that because... ?
:-)
It's a well-known abbreviation all over the world. I thought that ALL
literate people knew that. <sigh> They did bring down (Woodward &
Bernstein), with Judge Sirica's help, of course, our President Nixon.
A cool thing -- we actually met Sirica in his office a few days after
Nixon resigned. Nice guy.
Who is that Nixon guy?
Even if the makers still support the OS (which despite claims is not
true for old versions of Android either), the phone companies don't
keep supporting them forever - 3G networks are being turned off, 4G and
5G networks will also eventually be turned off as newer systems come
along. Your device may well still work, but it will be useless as a
phone / text-messenger.
Alan Browne wrote:
"WaPo" has been shorthand for The Washington Post since ... well a long freaking time.
But that's only clear *after* you've gone there, before that who knows
where it'll lead?
Alan Browne wrote:
"WaPo" has been shorthand for The Washington Post since ... well a long freaking time.
But that's only clear *after* you've gone there, before that who knows
where it'll lead?
On 11/4/23 6:50 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Who is that Nixon guy?
President
Plumbers
I am not a crook
Apple Brown Ratty
Deep Throat
On 5/11/2023, Andy Burns wrote:
"WaPo" has been shorthand for The Washington Post since ... well a long
freaking time.
But that's only clear *after* you've gone there, before that who knows
where it'll lead?
The Washington Post didn't factor in that an iPhone costs two to three
times as much over its lifetime to operate than an Android phone does.
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:
"WaPo" has been shorthand for The Washington Post since ... well a long
freaking time.
But that's only clear *after* you've gone there, before that who knows
where it'll lead?
Indeed, just saying "The Washington Post" would have been enough. (And explaining why the short URL was needed (i.e. to show an article behind a paywall).)
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:
"WaPo" has been shorthand for The Washington Post since ... well a long
freaking time.
But that's only clear *after* you've gone there, before that who knows
where it'll lead?
Indeed, just saying "The Washington Post" would have been enough. (And explaining why the short URL was needed (i.e. to show an article behind a paywall).)
Funny thing, when I - after the fact - invoked the URL, it failed two
or three times, one time wth a DNS lookup failure.
On 2023-11-05 05:44, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:
"WaPo" has been shorthand for The Washington Post since ... well a long >>> freaking time.
But that's only clear *after* you've gone there, before that who knows
where it'll lead?
Indeed, just saying "The Washington Post" would have been enough. (And explaining why the short URL was needed (i.e. to show an article behind a paywall).)
Correct. Next time I'll spell it out in full.
Incorrect: the article was a free "gift" - no paywall via that link.
Funny thing, when I - after the fact - invoked the URL, it failed two
or three times, one time wth a DNS lookup failure.
No issue here. Various browsers - not logged in to WaPo, from various
VPN sites (Paris, Tokyo, Santiago)
"WaPo" has been shorthand for The Washington Post since ... well a long >>>> freaking time.
But that's only clear *after* you've gone there, before that who knows
where it'll lead?
The Washington Post didn't factor in that an iPhone costs two to three
times as much over its lifetime to operate than an Android phone does.
How so? If I operated an Android the way I operate my iPhone the costs
would be the same (other than minor variance due to power consumption in
one over the other).
On 5/11/2023, Alan Browne wrote:
"WaPo" has been shorthand for The Washington Post since ... well a long >>>>> freaking time.
But that's only clear *after* you've gone there, before that who knows >>>> where it'll lead?
The Washington Post didn't factor in that an iPhone costs two to three
times as much over its lifetime to operate than an Android phone does.
How so? If I operated an Android the way I operate my iPhone the costs
would be the same (other than minor variance due to power consumption in
one over the other).
The Post only looked at a single cherry picked datapoint
This may change when Android devices also get updates for 7 years.
Because the value of older devices is also limited by the fact that many Android devices don't get any support after a couple of years while a 4
year old iPhone can still be used for a number of years.
The Post only looked at a single cherry picked datapoint
Uhm - no. They didn't.
"The iPhone is obviously superior at one thing. Ask your wallet."
-WaPo
https://wapo.st/45Ya1CH
On 5/11/2023, Alan Browne wrote:
The Post only looked at a single cherry picked datapoint
Uhm - no. They didn't.
Look again.
It's a cherry picked statistic that completely ignored lifetime costs.
Apple's lifetime costs are always double to triple that of Android.
It's a cherry picked statistic that completely ignored lifetime costs.
Not at all.
On 6/11/2023, Alan Browne wrote:
It's a cherry picked statistic that completely ignored lifetime costs.
Not at all.
When you average the huge waste of owning Apple products where you have to overcome the loss of ports and missing slots and proprietary cabling and repair costs so far off the charts everyone pays high ransoms to AppleCare, it's always 2X to 3X the overall cost of owning similar Android devices.
Doesn't it occur to you that's why Apple profits are so very high?
Or do you think Apple's profits are off the charts because they're not fleecing you every time you have to buy something that is free on Android?
People like you pay many times what Android costs & then brag about getting
a very tiny amount of your wasted money back in what you call resale value.
Apple makes all that money off of people like you.
On 2023-11-06 00:26, Frankie wrote:
On 6/11/2023, Alan Browne wrote:
It's a cherry picked statistic that completely ignored lifetime costs.
Not at all.
When you average the huge waste of owning Apple products where you
have to
overcome the loss of ports and missing slots and proprietary cabling and
repair costs so far off the charts everyone pays high ransoms to
AppleCare,
it's always 2X to 3X the overall cost of owning similar Android devices.
You can't come up with proof of that, of course. Since my devices in
the past came with all the cables I've ever needed, there is no cost to
add more.
On 2023-11-06 14:02, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-11-06 00:26, Frankie wrote:
On 6/11/2023, Alan Browne wrote:
It's a cherry picked statistic that completely ignored lifetime costs. >>>>Not at all.
When you average the huge waste of owning Apple products where you
have to
overcome the loss of ports and missing slots and proprietary cabling and >>> repair costs so far off the charts everyone pays high ransoms to
AppleCare,
it's always 2X to 3X the overall cost of owning similar Android devices.
You can't come up with proof of that, of course. Since my devices in
the past came with all the cables I've ever needed, there is no cost
to add more.
I remember a kid that got an Apple tablet (I don't know the proper name)
as a present from an uncle, who also came to configure it all for the
first time. Then the father bought him a foldable case, and had to pay
for it a hefty price. He commented on it to me, saying how expensive was
to own that Apple tablet, the housefold being otherwise on Android.
On 2023-11-06 08:18, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-06 14:02, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-11-06 00:26, Frankie wrote:
On 6/11/2023, Alan Browne wrote:
It's a cherry picked statistic that completely ignored lifetime
costs.
Not at all.
When you average the huge waste of owning Apple products where you
have to
overcome the loss of ports and missing slots and proprietary cabling
and
repair costs so far off the charts everyone pays high ransoms to
AppleCare,
it's always 2X to 3X the overall cost of owning similar Android
devices.
You can't come up with proof of that, of course. Since my devices in
the past came with all the cables I've ever needed, there is no cost
to add more.
I remember a kid that got an Apple tablet (I don't know the proper
name) as a present from an uncle, who also came to configure it all
for the first time. Then the father bought him a foldable case, and
had to pay for it a hefty price. He commented on it to me, saying how
expensive was to own that Apple tablet, the housefold being otherwise
on Android.
So buying an over priced case in a marketplace of thousands of lower
priced options plays into this? Sheesh.
Anyway, samples of one, picked for the comments, as always don't
represent the whole - not even close.
On 2023-11-06 14:32, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-11-06 08:18, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-06 14:02, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-11-06 00:26, Frankie wrote:
On 6/11/2023, Alan Browne wrote:
It's a cherry picked statistic that completely ignored lifetime
costs.
Not at all.
When you average the huge waste of owning Apple products where you
have to
overcome the loss of ports and missing slots and proprietary
cabling and
repair costs so far off the charts everyone pays high ransoms to
AppleCare,
it's always 2X to 3X the overall cost of owning similar Android
devices.
You can't come up with proof of that, of course. Since my devices
in the past came with all the cables I've ever needed, there is no
cost to add more.
I remember a kid that got an Apple tablet (I don't know the proper
name) as a present from an uncle, who also came to configure it all
for the first time. Then the father bought him a foldable case, and
had to pay for it a hefty price. He commented on it to me, saying how
expensive was to own that Apple tablet, the housefold being otherwise
on Android.
So buying an over priced case in a marketplace of thousands of lower
priced options plays into this? Sheesh.
Apple stuff.
Wen we have to buy Apple stuff we have to pay by the nose. Android Stuff
is cheaper.
It just is.
So when we have to decide what brand to buy a tablet or phone, that
enters our consideration, not being fans.
Anyway, samples of one, picked for the comments, as always don't
represent the whole - not even close.
Oh, but I had dozens of similar experiences in the last forty years or
so. Everybody I talked with along the years commented that owning an
Apple thing was expensive.
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
"The iPhone is obviously superior at one thing. Ask your wallet."
-WaPo
https://wapo.st/45Ya1CH
Do you actually resale your phone or does it go in the drawer as a spare? I’m leery of buying used phones unless they’re coming from someone I know.
And the times I do buy a phone it’s because the one I have is broken or too old. They end up in the drawer or given to recycle programs. I guess some people buy a new phone every year just to boast about it.
Or do you think Apple's profits are off the charts because they're not
fleecing you every time you have to buy something that is free on Android?
I've never been forced to buy anything extra from Apple to keep my Apple things going. Once case (above) was for "neatness".
Just tested on various browsers and different machines where I'm not
logged into my WaPo account.
The TCO of a flagship Android versus a flagship iPhone is very close.
The Android device will have a slightly lower initial cost but will also
have lower trade-in value or resale value.
For non-flagship devices it is probably also the case.
sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote
The TCO of a flagship Android versus a flagship iPhone is very close.
The Android device will have a slightly lower initial cost but will also
have lower trade-in value or resale value.
For non-flagship devices it is probably also the case.
Steve is wrong (he lies); and he's cherry picking only flagship Androids.
The only way an iPhone costs what Android costs is if you ignore costs.
But that's pure bullshit.
Ask Steve to lay out the true lifetime costs.
He won't.
That's how I know Steve is lying and not just confused.
Steve will _never_ lay out the lifetime costs he says he's calculated. Because he didn't calculate them.
He made them all up.
Out of nothing.
There isn't an iPhone alive that has the app power that even my _free_ Samsung Galaxy A32-5G has, and all I had to pay for it was the sales tax.
All my apps are free - so there's no cost in apps.
And T-Mobile replaced mine twice under warranty - so no repair costs.
If you purchase an iPhone, the initial sales tax alone is _more_ than I
spent on the lifetime of this phone (as all it ever needed was a case).
Yes - the free Android phone came with a high-speed charger, like most Android phones still do - and it came with the standard aux port too.
So I can use my wired headphones without having to run out and purchase an expensive set of headphones whose batteries constantly die on you.
And, um, no, I don't pay for a replacement-policy either, which is money wasted that many Apple owners pay for which Steve doesn't account for.
All of Steve's numbers are completely bogus because he cherry picks the phones and he ignores 99% of the Android phones that people actually buy.
On 6/11/2023, Alan Browne wrote:
Or do you think Apple's profits are off the charts because they're notI've never been forced to buy anything extra from Apple to keep my Apple
fleecing you every time you have to buy something that is free on Android? >>
things going. Once case (above) was for "neatness".
How are you going to get your wired headphones to work without buying something else to replace the headphone jack that Apple removed on purpose?
On 2023-11-10 06:04, Frankie wrote:
On 6/11/2023, Alan Browne wrote:
Or do you think Apple's profits are off the charts because they're not >>>> fleecing you every time you have to buy something that is free on
Android?
I've never been forced to buy anything extra from Apple to keep my Apple >>> things going. Once case (above) was for "neatness".
How are you going to get your wired headphones to work without buying
something else to replace the headphone jack that Apple removed on
purpose?
Or the FM radio.
On 2023-11-10 06:42, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-10 06:04, Frankie wrote:
On 6/11/2023, Alan Browne wrote:
Or do you think Apple's profits are off the charts because they're not >>>>> fleecing you every time you have to buy something that is free on
Android?
I've never been forced to buy anything extra from Apple to keep my
Apple
things going. Once case (above) was for "neatness".
How are you going to get your wired headphones to work without buying
something else to replace the headphone jack that Apple removed on
purpose?
Or the FM radio.
Again:
How many people are even AWARE that their phone has an FM radio?
Again, let me help you out:
<https://www.statista.com/statistics/215515/consumers-in-selected-countries-using-their-mobile-for-fm-radio/>
On 2023-11-10 17:21, Alan wrote:
On 2023-11-10 06:42, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-10 06:04, Frankie wrote:
On 6/11/2023, Alan Browne wrote:
Or do you think Apple's profits are off the charts because they're >>>>>> not
fleecing you every time you have to buy something that is free on
Android?
I've never been forced to buy anything extra from Apple to keep my
Apple
things going. Once case (above) was for "neatness".
How are you going to get your wired headphones to work without buying
something else to replace the headphone jack that Apple removed on
purpose?
Or the FM radio.
Again:
How many people are even AWARE that their phone has an FM radio?
I am using it right now :-)
Again, let me help you out:
<https://www.statista.com/statistics/215515/consumers-in-selected-countries-using-their-mobile-for-fm-radio/>
Did you look at the column for Spain? ;-)
On 2023-11-10 10:03, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-10 17:21, Alan wrote:
On 2023-11-10 06:42, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-10 06:04, Frankie wrote:
On 6/11/2023, Alan Browne wrote:
Or do you think Apple's profits are off the charts because
they're not
fleecing you every time you have to buy something that is free on >>>>>>> Android?
I've never been forced to buy anything extra from Apple to keep my >>>>>> Apple
things going. Once case (above) was for "neatness".
How are you going to get your wired headphones to work without buying >>>>> something else to replace the headphone jack that Apple removed on
purpose?
Or the FM radio.
Again:
How many people are even AWARE that their phone has an FM radio?
I am using it right now :-)
Again, let me help you out:
<https://www.statista.com/statistics/215515/consumers-in-selected-countries-using-their-mobile-for-fm-radio/>
Did you look at the column for Spain? ;-)
Yes. So what?
I'll turn it around.
I live in Canada and I have never ONCE seen anyone listening to FM radio
on a phone.
On 2023-11-10 19:08, Alan wrote:
On 2023-11-10 10:03, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-10 17:21, Alan wrote:
On 2023-11-10 06:42, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-10 06:04, Frankie wrote:
On 6/11/2023, Alan Browne wrote:
Or do you think Apple's profits are off the charts because
they're not fleecing you every time you have to buy something
that is free on Android?
I've never been forced to buy anything extra from Apple to keep
my Apple things going. Once case (above) was for "neatness".
How are you going to get your wired headphones to work without buying >>>>> something else to replace the headphone jack that Apple removed on >>>>> purpose?
Or the FM radio.
Again:
How many people are even AWARE that their phone has an FM radio?
I am using it right now :-)
Again, let me help you out:
<https://www.statista.com/statistics/215515/consumers-in-selected-countries-using-their-mobile-for-fm-radio/>
Did you look at the column for Spain? ;-)
Yes. So what?
I'll turn it around.
I live in Canada and I have never ONCE seen anyone listening to FM radio
on a phone.
But I have seen many, in my country.
Maybe you do not have a radio culture. We do.
On 2023-11-10 17:21, Alan wrote:
On 2023-11-10 06:42, Carlos E. R. wrote:
How many people are even AWARE that their phone has an FM radio?
I am using it right now :-)
On 11/10/2023 12:03 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-10 17:21, Alan wrote:
On 2023-11-10 06:42, Carlos E. R. wrote:
<snip>
How many people are even AWARE that their phone has an FM radio?
I am using it right now :-)
At the health club I go to they have three televisions viewable from
many of the exercise machines. They broadcast the audio on LPFM radio.
So it's useful to have a phone with an FM receiver if you want audio.
Alas, without a headphone jack, since the headphone wire acts as an
antenna, a built-in FM radio is not possible.
Bluetooth Auracast <https://www.bluetooth.com/auracast/>, when it is deployed, will be a better option for this sort of application.
There are some RTL receivers that can connect to USB-OTG, via a USB-A to USB-C, or a Micro-USB to USB-C adapter, so you can receive broadcast FM,
but these are unwieldy.
There was a Lightning FM radio for iPhones but it is no longer available <https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07G1LGS62>.
Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-11-10 19:08, Alan wrote:
On 2023-11-10 10:03, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-10 17:21, Alan wrote:
On 2023-11-10 06:42, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-10 06:04, Frankie wrote:
On 6/11/2023, Alan Browne wrote:
Or do you think Apple's profits are off the charts because
they're not fleecing you every time you have to buy something >>>>>>>>> that is free on Android?
I've never been forced to buy anything extra from Apple to keep >>>>>>>> my Apple things going. Once case (above) was for "neatness".
How are you going to get your wired headphones to work without buying >>>>>>> something else to replace the headphone jack that Apple removed on >>>>>>> purpose?
Or the FM radio.
Again:
How many people are even AWARE that their phone has an FM radio?
I am using it right now :-)
Again, let me help you out:
<https://www.statista.com/statistics/215515/consumers-in-selected-countries-using-their-mobile-for-fm-radio/>
Did you look at the column for Spain? ;-)
Yes. So what?
I'll turn it around.
I live in Canada and I have never ONCE seen anyone listening to FM radio >>> on a phone.
That's what you get for buying iPhones!
BTW, we've never ONCE seen anyone using iMessage! Your point being?
But I have seen many, in my country.
Maybe you do not have a radio culture. We do.
<firmly sitting on hands>
What's next? USB-C charging ports? (Non) Supplied chargers? iMessage
on Android? Just use a news server with short retention and start all
over.
Can someone please pass the popcorn?
On 11/10/2023 12:03 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-10 17:21, Alan wrote:
On 2023-11-10 06:42, Carlos E. R. wrote:
<snip>
How many people are even AWARE that their phone has an FM radio?
I am using it right now :-)
At the health club I go to they have three televisions viewable from
many of the exercise machines. They broadcast the audio on LPFM radio.
So it's useful to have a phone with an FM receiver if you want audio.
Alas, without a headphone jack, since the headphone wire acts as an
antenna, a built-in FM radio is not possible.
Bluetooth Auracast <https://www.bluetooth.com/auracast/>, when it is deployed, will be a better option for this sort of application.
There are some RTL receivers that can connect to USB-OTG, via a USB-A to USB-C, or a Micro-USB to USB-C adapter, so you can receive broadcast FM,
but these are unwieldy.
There was a Lightning FM radio for iPhones but it is no longer available <https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07G1LGS62>.
On 2023-11-10 10:03, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-10 17:21, Alan wrote:
On 2023-11-10 06:42, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-10 06:04, Frankie wrote:
On 6/11/2023, Alan Browne wrote:
Or do you think Apple's profits are off the charts because they're >>>>>>> not
fleecing you every time you have to buy something that is free on >>>>>>> Android?
I've never been forced to buy anything extra from Apple to keep my >>>>>> Apple
things going. Once case (above) was for "neatness".
How are you going to get your wired headphones to work without buying >>>>> something else to replace the headphone jack that Apple removed on
purpose?
Or the FM radio.
Again:
How many people are even AWARE that their phone has an FM radio?
I am using it right now :-)
Again, let me help you out:
<https://www.statista.com/statistics/215515/consumers-in-selected-countries-using-their-mobile-for-fm-radio/>
Did you look at the column for Spain? ;-)
Yes. So what?
I'll turn it around.
I live in Canada and I have never ONCE seen anyone listening to FM radio
on a phone.
How do you even "see" someone listening to FM radio?
When I had an android phone I certainly used to and it was something I
missed when changing to iphone. There are times and places where there's
poor mobile data signal yet radio would still work.
It's moot now with the growing lack of headphone jack and ubiquity of wireless headphones there's no wire for the aerial.
There was a Lightning FM radio for iPhones but it is no longer available
<https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07G1LGS62>.
I have been listening to the radio in this room for the last two months, using Open Radio app on a tablet (ie, via internet) and a BT speaker.
On 2023-11-10 20:32, Frank Slootweg wrote:[...]
What's next? USB-C charging ports? (Non) Supplied chargers? iMessage
on Android? Just use a news server with short retention and start all
over.
Can someone please pass the popcorn?
Nah, RCS doesn't support matter transfers yet. :-)
I live in Canada and I have never ONCE seen anyone listening to FM radio
on a phone.
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote
There was a Lightning FM radio for iPhones but it is no longer available >>> <https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07G1LGS62>.
I have been listening to the radio in this room for the last two months,
using Open Radio app on a tablet (ie, via internet) and a BT speaker.
Bear in mind it's only iPhones which completely lack modern functionality (such as portable memory slots and the industry standard 3.5mm aux jack).
FACT:
Most Android phones have them; yet no new iPhones do.
On 2023-11-10 13:08, Alan wrote:
I live in Canada and I have never ONCE seen anyone listening to FM radio
on a phone.
If you see someone using an iPhone listening to their buds, they may
indeed be listening to a radio station feed via itunes or Web interface.
Not sure how you would see that, of course.
How many people are even AWARE that their phone has an FM radio?
I am using it right now :-)
At the health club I go to they have three televisions viewable from
many of the exercise machines. They broadcast the audio on LPFM radio.
So it's useful to have a phone with an FM receiver if you want audio.
Alas, without a headphone jack, since the headphone wire acts as an
antenna, a built-in FM radio is not possible.
Bluetooth Auracast <https://www.bluetooth.com/auracast/>, when it is deployed, will be a better option for this sort of application.
There are some RTL receivers that can connect to USB-OTG, via a USB-A to USB-C, or a Micro-USB to USB-C adapter, so you can receive broadcast FM,
but these are unwieldy.
There was a Lightning FM radio for iPhones but it is no longer available <https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07G1LGS62>.
Using <news:uim0l3$2vtg8$1@dont-email.me>, sms wrote:
How many people are even AWARE that their phone has an FM radio?
I am using it right now :-)
At the health club I go to they have three televisions viewable from
many of the exercise machines. They broadcast the audio on LPFM radio.
So it's useful to have a phone with an FM receiver if you want audio.
Alas, without a headphone jack, since the headphone wire acts as an
antenna, a built-in FM radio is not possible.
Bluetooth Auracast <https://www.bluetooth.com/auracast/>, when it is
deployed, will be a better option for this sort of application.
There are some RTL receivers that can connect to USB-OTG, via a USB-A
to USB-C, or a Micro-USB to USB-C adapter, so you can receive broadcast
FM, but these are unwieldy.
There was a Lightning FM radio for iPhones but it is no longer
available <https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07G1LGS62>.
I would like to ask if there is any advantage to the user not having these fundamental components in a phone compared to a basic phone that has them?
Aux jacks
SD slots
FM radios
On 2023-11-11 01:33, Wally J wrote:
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote
There was a Lightning FM radio for iPhones but it is no longer available >>>> <https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07G1LGS62>.
I have been listening to the radio in this room for the last two months, >>> using Open Radio app on a tablet (ie, via internet) and a BT speaker.
Bear in mind it's only iPhones which completely lack modern functionality
(such as portable memory slots and the industry standard 3.5mm aux jack).
FACT:
Most Android phones have them; yet no new iPhones do.
So your "only iPhones" is a lie.
I would like to ask if there is any advantage to the user not having these fundamental components in a phone compared to a basic phone that has them?
Aux jacks
SD slots
FM radios
Alan, 2023-11-12 02:20:
On 2023-11-11 01:33, Wally J wrote:
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote
There was a Lightning FM radio for iPhones but it is no longer available >>>>> <https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07G1LGS62>.
I have been listening to the radio in this room for the last two months, >>>> using Open Radio app on a tablet (ie, via internet) and a BT speaker.
Bear in mind it's only iPhones which completely lack modern functionality >>> (such as portable memory slots and the industry standard 3.5mm aux jack). >>>
FACT:
Most Android phones have them; yet no new iPhones do.
So your "only iPhones" is a lie.
Indeed. Samsung Android devices don't have a headphone jack and also no
SD card slot. And the same applies to Google Pixel and many other vendors.
Just some Chinese vendors still provide this because it seems to be
important for their market. But otherwise SD cards and headphone jacks
are mostly gone.
Even the newer models of Fairphone which claim to be sustainable and following the needs of the users do not have a headphone jack.Fairphones are not known for being feature rich, precisely.
Indeed. Samsung Android devices don't have a headphone jack and also no
SD card slot. And the same applies to Google Pixel and many other vendors.
Fewer holes in the case for dust and water to get inside for a start.
FM radios
Just something else to go wrong that most people would never use anyway.
Just some Chinese vendors still provide this because it seems to be
important for their market. But otherwise SD cards and headphone jacks
are mostly gone.
Not true.
Motorola has them, for instance.
Less parts which can break.
And also the devices get cheaper if vendors don't have to add parts
which are only useful for a limited number of customers.
Personally I don't miss SD cards - sometimes they started failing in
less than a year and they are usually much slower than internal memory.
And having 128 GB of storage in my current Google Pixel 6a is completely sufficient for my needs.
Also FM radio was never important for me. And if I want to listen to the radio while commuting to the office, I get all the radio stations online
as well. And with a data plan which provides 20 GB per month this is not
a problem at all. Yes, for people living in areas with flaky mobile
networks this may be different.
FM radio also requires a headphone jack since the cable is used as
antenna. So using that with wireless headphones is not possible at all -
but many people nowadays like to have wireless headphones. And using
USB-C headphones is not much different to having a headphone jack. In
fact with an external USB DAC you can get much better audio quality if
you are an audiophile and want to listen to your FLAC music collection
with the highest possible quality:
<https://www.audioquest.com/dacs/dragonfly/dragonfly-cobalt>
I would like to ask if there is any advantage to the user not having these fundamental components in a phone compared to a basic phone that has them?
Aux jacks
SD slots
FM radios
Indeed. Samsung Android devices don't have a headphone jack and also no
SD card slot. And the same applies to Google Pixel and many other vendors.
using USB-C headphones is not much different to having a headphone
jack. In fact with an external USB DAC you can get much better audio
quality if you are an audiophile and want to listen to your FLAC
music collection with the highest possible quality...
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
Samsung Android devices don't have a headphone jack and also no SD
card slot...
Make that *some* Samsung Android devices, probably mainly/only the
high-end models. My Galaxy A51 has headphone jack, SD card slot and
FM radio.
And even the newest replacement (A54G) still has a SD card slot
(USB-C earjack, no details about FM radio).
So over time these features may be phased out, but rather slowly and
the SD card slot is probably the last to go. (The SD card slot has
become less important because of larger and relatively cheaper
Internal Storage sizes, but not unimportant, especially not at the
low end.)
On 2023-11-12 10:37, Arno Welzel wrote:[...]
Indeed. Samsung Android devices don't have a headphone jack and also no
SD card slot. And the same applies to Google Pixel and many other vendors. >>
Just some Chinese vendors still provide this because it seems to be
important for their market. But otherwise SD cards and headphone jacks
are mostly gone.
Not true.
Motorola has them, for instance.
On this Sun, 12 Nov 2023 18:00:33 +1300, Your Name wrote:
Fewer holes in the case for dust and water to get inside for a start.
FM radios
Are the IP ratings higher for all the phones that lack the normal ports?
On Sun, 12 Nov 2023 13:58:25 +0100, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Just some Chinese vendors still provide this because it seems to be
important for their market. But otherwise SD cards and headphone jacks
are mostly gone.
Not true.
Motorola has them, for instance.
Not only Motorola. But also most Android phones have them.
Any phone with them can do more than any phone without them.
And any phone without them does less than any phone with them.
On 11/12/2023 4:48 AM, Arno Welzel wrote:[...]
Less parts which can break.
And also the devices get cheaper if vendors don't have to add parts
which are only useful for a limited number of customers.
Which means by definition, if it's missing these important hardware capabilities, it's a less functional device than one that has them.
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
[...]
Indeed. Samsung Android devices don't have a headphone jack and also no
SD card slot. And the same applies to Google Pixel and many other vendors.
Make that *some* Samsung Android devices, probably mainly/only the
high-end models.
My Galaxy A51 has headphone jack, SD card slot and FM radio. And even
the newest replacement (A54G) still has a SD card slot (USB-C earjack,
no details about FM radio).
On 11/12/2023 8:20 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
Samsung Android devices don't have a headphone jack and also no SD
card slot...
Make that *some* Samsung Android devices, probably mainly/only the
high-end models. My Galaxy A51 has headphone jack, SD card slot and
FM radio.
My Galaxy S10+ was a high end model and it has no FM radio.
And even the newest replacement (A54G) still has a SD card slot
(USB-C earjack, no details about FM radio).
But my phone does have the slot and earphone hole which I seldom use. I
won't miss them when they're gone from my future phone. However I still
like using them on (MOST of-see below) my other Android toys...
When data was very expensive, an FM radio was a useful feature to listen
to music without consuming data. It's still useful in certain situations
such as when natural disasters take down the cellular networks and to
receive LPFM broadcasts in some venues. I wonder how many people have a battery powered radio at home anymore.
On 11/12/2023 8:20 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
Samsung Android devices don't have a headphone jack and also no SD
card slot...
Make that *some* Samsung Android devices, probably mainly/only the
high-end models. My Galaxy A51 has headphone jack, SD card slot and
FM radio.
My Galaxy S10+ was a high end model and it has no FM radio.
AJL <noemail@none.com> wrote:
My Galaxy S10+ was a high end model and it has no FM radio.
Are you sure?
On my A51, the app is not on any of the normal app pages/screen, only
in the 'Samsung' folder (together with other Samsung apps like My
Files, Internet, Smart Switch, etc.) and it's called just 'Radio',
not 'FM Radio', so it's quite hidden.
But my phone does have the slot and earphone hole which I seldom
use. I won't miss them when they're gone from my future phone.
However I still like using them on (MOST of-see below) my other
Android toys...
Sofar, I use none of the three (headphone jack, SD card slot and FM
radio), but it's nice to know they're there, just in case.
BTW starting last night my Android Usenet apps
(Groundhog, PhoNews, andNNTP NewsReader)
ALL stopped working on ALL my Android and
Chromedevices with Eternal-September. All say
they cannot connect. But yet ESstill works Ok
with this Windows T-Bird. Just tried it again,
and still out. Weird...
Fewer holes in the case for dust and water to get inside for a start.
FM radios
Are the IP ratings higher for all the phones that lack the normal ports?
It is easier to achieve with one less jack opening in the case. But of
course it is also possible with headphone jacks. My old Sony Z3 Compact
was also water proof and it had a headphone jack. But back then it was
also not the cheapest one compared to other devices with similar hardware.
Sofar, I use none of the three (headphone jack, SD card slot and FM
radio), but it's nice to know they're there, just in case.
Yup. Like a fire extinguisher...
Motorola has them, for instance.
So what? I said "mostly" and not "completely". This means: most vendors
don't add headphone jacks any longer. This is still true, even if
Motorola still adds them.
Everything started working again for all the
newsreaders and devices. Mystery why
Androids quit and not Windows. This newsreader
Is usually bad in posting but lets see if I can
edit it out. Am using NNTP NewsReader on
an Amazon tablet...
Frank Slootweg, 2023-11-12 16:20:
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
[...]
Indeed. Samsung Android devices don't have a headphone jack and also no
SD card slot. And the same applies to Google Pixel and many other vendors.
Make that *some* Samsung Android devices, probably mainly/only the high-end models.
My Galaxy A51 has headphone jack, SD card slot and FM radio. And even
the newest replacement (A54G) still has a SD card slot (USB-C earjack,
no details about FM radio).
The A51 it is more than three years old. The A54 does not have a
headphone jack any longer and if you want to use the SD card you have to
give up a SIM slot for that - probably because it was cheaper just to
keep the slot as it is as long as Samsung can not ditch this completely
when using eSIM only in the future.
AJL wrote:
AJL wrote:
BTW starting last night my Android Usenet apps (Groundhog,
PhoNews, and NNTP NewsReader) ALL stopped working on ALL my
Android and Chrome devices with Eternal-September. All say they
cannot connect. But yet ES still works Ok with this Windows
T-Bird. Just tried it again, and still out. Weird...
Everything started working again for all the newsreaders and
devices. Mystery why Androids quit and not Windows. This
newsreader Is usually bad in posting but lets see if I can edit it
out. Am using NNTP NewsReader on an Amazon tablet...
Were the devices using the same internet connection as Windows?
If so, mysterious;
if they were using mobile data, less so.
sms, 2023-11-12 15:30:
[...]
When data was very expensive, an FM radio was a useful feature to listen
to music without consuming data. It's still useful in certain situations such as when natural disasters take down the cellular networks and to receive LPFM broadcasts in some venues. I wonder how many people have a battery powered radio at home anymore.
I wonder if people would even know how to use the FM radio in there
phone. And besides that - with a natural disaster a fragile device which
only lasts 20-40 hours with one battery charge is not that helpful anyway.
On 11/12/2023 8:20 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
So over time these features may be phased out, but rather slowly and
the SD card slot is probably the last to go. (The SD card slot has
become less important because of larger and relatively cheaper
Internal Storage sizes, but not unimportant, especially not at the
low end.)
Yup. My latest Lenovo Chrome tablet has ONLY USB-C. No other slots or
holes. Probably the coming thing.
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
[...]
Indeed. Samsung Android devices don't have a headphone jack and also no
SD card slot. And the same applies to Google Pixel and many other vendors.
Make that *some* Samsung Android devices, probably mainly/only the high-end models.
My Galaxy A51 has headphone jack, SD card slot and FM radio. And even
the newest replacement (A54G) still has a SD card slot (USB-C earjack,
no details about FM radio).
So over time these features may be phased out, but rather slowly and
the SD card slot is probably the last to go. (The SD card slot has
become less important because of larger and relatively cheaper Internal Storage sizes, but not unimportant, especially not at the low end.)
sms, 2023-11-12 15:30:
[...]
When data was very expensive, an FM radio was a useful feature to listen
to music without consuming data. It's still useful in certain situations
such as when natural disasters take down the cellular networks and to
receive LPFM broadcasts in some venues. I wonder how many people have a
battery powered radio at home anymore.
I wonder if people would even know how to use the FM radio in there
phone. And besides that - with a natural disaster a fragile device which
only lasts 20-40 hours with one battery charge is not that helpful anyway.
On 2023-11-12 17:00, AJL wrote:
My latest Lenovo Chrome tablet has ONLY USB-C. No other slots or
holes. Probably the coming thing.
They could have two or three connectors, though. I would find that
useful.
"The iPhone is obviously superior at one thing. Ask your wallet."
On 2023-11-12 17:00, AJL wrote:
On 11/12/2023 8:20 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
...
So over time these features may be phased out, but rather slowly and
the SD card slot is probably the last to go. (The SD card slot has
become less important because of larger and relatively cheaper
Internal Storage sizes, but not unimportant, especially not at the
low end.)
Yup. My latest Lenovo Chrome tablet has ONLY USB-C. No other slots or
holes. Probably the coming thing.
They could have two or three connectors, though. I would find that useful.
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:[...]
Frank Slootweg, 2023-11-12 16:20:
My Galaxy A51 has headphone jack, SD card slot and FM radio. And even
the newest replacement (A54G) still has a SD card slot (USB-C earjack,
no details about FM radio).
The A51 it is more than three years old. The A54 does not have a
headphone jack any longer and if you want to use the SD card you have to
give up a SIM slot for that - probably because it was cheaper just to
keep the slot as it is as long as Samsung can not ditch this completely
when using eSIM only in the future.
Yes, the A51 is more than three years old, but this urban legend
(mainly from Apple fanbois) about no headphone jack/SD card slot/FM radio
has been going on even longer than that and there have been several
models between the 'old' A51 and the current A54G.
Carlos E. R., 2023-11-12 22:57:
On 2023-11-12 17:00, AJL wrote:
On 11/12/2023 8:20 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
...
So over time these features may be phased out, but rather slowly and
the SD card slot is probably the last to go. (The SD card slot has
become less important because of larger and relatively cheaper
Internal Storage sizes, but not unimportant, especially not at the
low end.)
Yup. My latest Lenovo Chrome tablet has ONLY USB-C. No other slots or
holes. Probably the coming thing.
They could have two or three connectors, though. I would find that useful.
One USB-C connector is enough to connect it to a dock which provides
power and additional USB ports for peripherials.
Indeed I find this much
easier than having to connect multiple cables whenever a tablet should
be used with a keyboard/mouse etc.. - similar to using a laptop either
with a dock as a stationary device.
On 11/12/2023 2:57 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-12 17:00, AJL wrote:
My latest Lenovo Chrome tablet has ONLY USB-C. No other slots or
holes. Probably the coming thing.
They could have two or three connectors, though. I would find that
useful.
My current 11" Lenovo Chrome tablet does have 2 USB-C connectors, one at
the top and one at the bottom (held in portrait mode). Their earlier
model had only one. So someone in design apparently heard folks like you...
Frank Slootweg, 2023-11-12 21:24:
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:[...]
Frank Slootweg, 2023-11-12 16:20:
My Galaxy A51 has headphone jack, SD card slot and FM radio. And even >>> the newest replacement (A54G) still has a SD card slot (USB-C earjack, >>> no details about FM radio).
The A51 it is more than three years old. The A54 does not have a
headphone jack any longer and if you want to use the SD card you have to >> give up a SIM slot for that - probably because it was cheaper just to
keep the slot as it is as long as Samsung can not ditch this completely
when using eSIM only in the future.
Yes, the A51 is more than three years old, but this urban legend
(mainly from Apple fanbois) about no headphone jack/SD card slot/FM radio has been going on even longer than that and there have been several
models between the 'old' A51 and the current A54G.
I never said, that *no* device has this any more, just that the
headphone jack is disappearing since an increasing number of devices
does not have it any longer - like the Samsung A54 compared to the A51.
BTW: The name is just "A54" and not "A54G"...
<https://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/phones/galaxy-a54/buy/?modelCode=SM-A546ULVBXAA>
On 2023-11-13 08:48, Arno Welzel wrote:[...]
One USB-C connector is enough to connect it to a dock which provides
power and additional USB ports for peripherials.
That's extra hardware to buy.
Indeed I find this much
easier than having to connect multiple cables whenever a tablet should
be used with a keyboard/mouse etc.. - similar to using a laptop either
with a dock as a stationary device.
I have a connector with 1 male (micro USB) and 4 females, one intended
for a charger. I can not connect a charger and at the same time a mouse, doesn't fully work, even though the thing has a switch designed to allow
just this usage.
On 2023-11-13 08:48, Arno Welzel wrote:[...]
One USB-C connector is enough to connect it to a dock which provides
power and additional USB ports for peripherials.
That's extra hardware to buy.
Well - a dock to connect mobile devices to stationary peripherials is
not "extra" for me but the most easy way to use the hardware.
You plug in your peripherials and power adapter *once* to the dock and
then you only ever need exaclt *one* plug to connect all the stuff to
your table (or laptop etc.).
It's still extra hardware to buy, stock & always carry around with you
for a phone that's supposed to be stuck into your pocket as you move about.
I never said, that *no* device has this any more, just that the
headphone jack is disappearing since an increasing number of devices
does not have it any longer - like the Samsung A54 compared to the A51.
Sorry about the confusion. Yes, I understood what you meant and agree
with it. I just wanted to put the 'oldness' of the A51 in perspective by explaining that there were models between the A51 and A54 which still
had some more of The Three Features (TM) :-)
Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote
I never said, that *no* device has this any more, just that the
headphone jack is disappearing since an increasing number of devices
does not have it any longer - like the Samsung A54 compared to the A51.
Sorry about the confusion. Yes, I understood what you meant and agree
with it. I just wanted to put the 'oldness' of the A51 in perspective by
explaining that there were models between the A51 and A54 which still
had some more of The Three Features (TM) :-)
FACTS + Logic = Sense
Facts first...
Last we checked _most Android devices_ still had "The Three Features".
a. sd slot
b. aux jack
c. fast charger in the box
*66% to 78% of Android phones still have modern hardware functionality*
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/vLB-bIF-P5Q/>
My free Samsung Galaxy A32-5G came with all three, and it's a cheap phone (which puts to rest the "claim" that Apple does it to lower phone costs).
Arno Welzel wrote on Mon, 13 Nov 2023 12:56:14 +0100 :
On 2023-11-13 08:48, Arno Welzel wrote:[...]
One USB-C connector is enough to connect it to a dock which provides
power and additional USB ports for peripherials.
That's extra hardware to buy.
Well - a dock to connect mobile devices to stationary peripherials is
not "extra" for me but the most easy way to use the hardware.
You plug in your peripherials and power adapter *once* to the dock and
then you only ever need exaclt *one* plug to connect all the stuff to
your table (or laptop etc.).
It's still extra hardware to buy, stock & always carry around with you
for a phone that's supposed to be stuck into your pocket as you move about.
Carlos E. R., 2023-11-13 10:53:
On 2023-11-13 08:48, Arno Welzel wrote:[...]
One USB-C connector is enough to connect it to a dock which provides
power and additional USB ports for peripherials.
That's extra hardware to buy.
Well - a dock to connect mobile devices to stationary peripherials is
not "extra" for me but the most easy way to use the hardware.
You plug in your peripherials and power adapter *once* to the dock and
then you only ever need exaclt *one* plug to connect all the stuff to
your table (or laptop etc.).
Indeed I find this much
easier than having to connect multiple cables whenever a tablet should
be used with a keyboard/mouse etc.. - similar to using a laptop either
with a dock as a stationary device.
I have a connector with 1 male (micro USB) and 4 females, one intended
for a charger. I can not connect a charger and at the same time a mouse,
doesn't fully work, even though the thing has a switch designed to allow
just this usage.
I talk about USB-C not MicroUSB. MicroUSB is not designed for that.
USB-C is.
So over time these features may be phased out, but rather slowly and
the SD card slot is probably the last to go. (The SD card slot has
become less important because of larger and relatively cheaper Internal
Storage sizes, but not unimportant, especially not at the low end.)
My Motorola is dual SIM, but actually instead of a second sim I can put
a memory card. It is either sim or memory card, not both.
My second motorola phone did not mention FM radio, but when I initially cloned it over from my previous phone, the FM radio app was installed
and actually works.
Yes, the A51 is more than three years old, but this urban legend
(mainly from Apple fanbois) about no headphone jack/SD card slot/FM radio
has been going on even longer than that and there have been several
models between the 'old' A51 and the current A54G.
I never said, that *no* device has this any more, just that the
headphone jack is disappearing since an increasing number of devices
does not have it any longer - like the Samsung A54 compared to the A51.
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote
Yes, the A51 is more than three years old, but this urban legend
(mainly from Apple fanbois) about no headphone jack/SD card slot/FM radio >>> has been going on even longer than that and there have been several
models between the 'old' A51 and the current A54G.
I never said, that *no* device has this any more, just that the
headphone jack is disappearing since an increasing number of devices
does not have it any longer - like the Samsung A54 compared to the A51.
Arno,
The headphone jack is very much alive and well & it is not disappearing.
FACTS
*56% of Androids have both an internal FM IC and the required aux jack*
The problem I have with you is you just guess at everything.
Which would be fine if your guess was even close to correct.
But by always just guessing, you're always just dead wrong.
You know nothing when all you do is guess about everything.
I don't guess.
I look things up instead of guessing.
I ran a search just now for my phone FM radio and the result said most Android phones come not only with the aux slot but _also_ with the FM IC.
<https://versus.com/en/samsung-galaxy-a32-5g/radio>
Here are the results for my phone lookup (which is an inexpensive Android):
<https://i.postimg.cc/5NSxqRHj/fmradio02.jpg> 56% Androids have the FM IC
Arno Welzel wrote on Mon, 13 Nov 2023 12:56:14 +0100 :
On 2023-11-13 08:48, Arno Welzel wrote:[...]
One USB-C connector is enough to connect it to a dock which provides
power and additional USB ports for peripherials.
That's extra hardware to buy.
Well - a dock to connect mobile devices to stationary peripherials is
not "extra" for me but the most easy way to use the hardware.
You plug in your peripherials and power adapter *once* to the dock and
then you only ever need exaclt *one* plug to connect all the stuff to
your table (or laptop etc.).
It's still extra hardware to buy, stock & always carry around with you
for a phone that's supposed to be stuck into your pocket as you move about.
OTOH, if it concerns a tablet and needs only a keyboard (and perhaps a mouse), there are probably simpler/'neater' options than a dock.
On 11/13/2023 1:21 PM, Andrew wrote:
<snip>
It's still extra hardware to buy, stock & always carry around with you
for a phone that's supposed to be stuck into your pocket as you move about.
It was rather amazing for Apple to bring back decontented connectors on
the Macbook after users complained about "dongle hell." <https://www.wired.com/story/apple-macbook-ports-rave/>.
On 2023-11-13 12:23, Wally J wrote:[...]
My free Samsung Galaxy A32-5G came with all three, and it's a cheap phone
(which puts to rest the "claim" that Apple does it to lower phone costs).
A claim I haven't seen anyone make.
Alan, 2023-11-13 22:06:
On 2023-11-13 12:23, Wally J wrote:[...]
My free Samsung Galaxy A32-5G came with all three, and it's a cheap phone >>> (which puts to rest the "claim" that Apple does it to lower phone costs). >>A claim I haven't seen anyone make.
And the A32 is also 3 years old. Current Samsung models don't have a headphone jack any longer.
Alan, 2023-11-13 22:06:
On 2023-11-13 12:23, Wally J wrote:[...]
My free Samsung Galaxy A32-5G came with all three, and it's a cheap phone >>> (which puts to rest the "claim" that Apple does it to lower phone costs). >>A claim I haven't seen anyone make.
And the A32 is also 3 years old. Current Samsung models don't have a headphone jack any longer.
sms, 2023-11-13 21:13:
On 11/13/2023 1:21 PM, Andrew wrote:
<snip>
It's still extra hardware to buy, stock & always carry around with youIt was rather amazing for Apple to bring back decontented connectors on
for a phone that's supposed to be stuck into your pocket as you move about. >>
the Macbook after users complained about "dongle hell."
<https://www.wired.com/story/apple-macbook-ports-rave/>.
Well - in our company there is a USB-C on every desk, connected to the stationary display, keyboard and mouse and LAN which also powers the connected laptop. My collegues would not like it, if they always had to connect or disconnect HDMI, keyboard/mouse, LAN cable and power cable
all the time just to take their laptop with them or get back to the desk
and continue working with the stationary peripherials.
It's nice thow to have the option - but I will never understand why
anyone thinks having a bunch of cables for external devices is better
than *one* cable connected to a stationary dock.
On 2023-11-16 05:39, Arno Welzel wrote:
Alan, 2023-11-13 22:06:
On 2023-11-13 12:23, Wally J wrote:[...]
My free Samsung Galaxy A32-5G came with all three, and it's a cheap
phone
(which puts to rest the "claim" that Apple does it to lower phone
costs).
A claim I haven't seen anyone make.
And the A32 is also 3 years old. Current Samsung models don't have a
headphone jack any longer.
https://www.wired.com/gallery/best-headphone-jack-phones/
*The Best Phones With an Actual Headphone Jack*
Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
I only needed to search for 30 seconds.
On 2023-11-16 05:59, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-16 05:39, Arno Welzel wrote:
Alan, 2023-11-13 22:06:
On 2023-11-13 12:23, Wally J wrote:[...]
My free Samsung Galaxy A32-5G came with all three, and it's a cheap
phone
(which puts to rest the "claim" that Apple does it to lower phone
costs).
A claim I haven't seen anyone make.
And the A32 is also 3 years old. Current Samsung models don't have a
headphone jack any longer.
https://www.wired.com/gallery/best-headphone-jack-phones/
*The Best Phones With an Actual Headphone Jack*
Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
I only needed to search for 30 seconds.
And found a low end Samsung. Most flagship/high end Samsung's have lost
the headphone jack.
I only needed to search for 30 seconds.
And found a low end Samsung. Most flagship/high end Samsung's have lost
the headphone jack.
On 2023-11-16 05:39, Arno Welzel wrote:
And the A32 is also 3 years old. Current Samsung models don't have a
headphone jack any longer.
https://www.wired.com/gallery/best-headphone-jack-phones/
*The Best Phones With an Actual Headphone Jack*
Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
I only needed to search for 30 seconds.
The same link I posted cites as second choice the Asus Zenfone 10, with
a price of $700...$750, which is not low end, or the Asus ROG Phone 7 at $1000..$1400, or the Sony Xperia 1 V at $1400.
On 2023-11-16 14:21, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-11-16 05:59, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-16 05:39, Arno Welzel wrote:
Alan, 2023-11-13 22:06:
On 2023-11-13 12:23, Wally J wrote:[...]
My free Samsung Galaxy A32-5G came with all three, and it's a
cheap phone
(which puts to rest the "claim" that Apple does it to lower phone
costs).
A claim I haven't seen anyone make.
And the A32 is also 3 years old. Current Samsung models don't have a
headphone jack any longer.
https://www.wired.com/gallery/best-headphone-jack-phones/
*The Best Phones With an Actual Headphone Jack*
Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
I only needed to search for 30 seconds.
And found a low end Samsung. Most flagship/high end Samsung's have
lost the headphone jack.
But that is not what Arno claimed.
The same link I posted cites as second choice the Asus Zenfone 10, with
a price of $700...$750, which is not low end, or the Asus ROG Phone 7 at $1000..$1400, or the Sony Xperia 1 V at $1400.
And found a low end Samsung. Most flagship/high end Samsung's have
lost the headphone jack.
But that is not what Arno claimed.
The same link I posted cites as second choice the Asus Zenfone 10, with
a price of $700...$750, which is not low end, or the Asus ROG Phone 7 at
$1000..$1400, or the Sony Xperia 1 V at $1400.
I could care less.
Which means by definition, if it's missing these important hardware
capabilities, it's a less functional device than one that has them.
By definition yes. But by definition a modern car does not have a steam engine and can not run on coal and water. So it is a less functional
vehicle as well ;-)
Andrew, 2023-11-13 20:21:
Arno Welzel wrote on Mon, 13 Nov 2023 12:56:14 +0100 :
On 2023-11-13 08:48, Arno Welzel wrote:[...]
One USB-C connector is enough to connect it to a dock which provides >>>>> power and additional USB ports for peripherials.
That's extra hardware to buy.
Well - a dock to connect mobile devices to stationary peripherials is
not "extra" for me but the most easy way to use the hardware.
You plug in your peripherials and power adapter *once* to the dock and
then you only ever need exaclt *one* plug to connect all the stuff to
your table (or laptop etc.).
It's still extra hardware to buy, stock & always carry around with you
for a phone that's supposed to be stuck into your pocket as you move about.
You always carry a mouse and keyboard with your phone? Or a charger?
We talk about the usecase of connecting peripherials to a phone or a tablet.
using USB-C headphones is not much different to having a headphone
jack. In fact with an external USB DAC you can get much better audio
quality if you are an audiophile and want to listen to your FLAC
music collection with the highest possible quality...
Agreed. On all my Android devices (including my phone) that have both
USB-C and headphone holes, when using the same headphones the audio is
much better using the USB-C port. The PITA of using a dongle is well
worth it IMO...
It's much more like you saying a car that doesn't have any engine at
all (since the items are gone) is more powerful than a car that has
an engine.
On 2023-11-16 09:59, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-16 14:21, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-11-16 05:59, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-16 05:39, Arno Welzel wrote:
Alan, 2023-11-13 22:06:
On 2023-11-13 12:23, Wally J wrote:[...]
My free Samsung Galaxy A32-5G came with all three, and it's a
cheap phone
(which puts to rest the "claim" that Apple does it to lower phone >>>>>>> costs).
A claim I haven't seen anyone make.
And the A32 is also 3 years old. Current Samsung models don't have a >>>>> headphone jack any longer.
https://www.wired.com/gallery/best-headphone-jack-phones/
*The Best Phones With an Actual Headphone Jack*
Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
I only needed to search for 30 seconds.
And found a low end Samsung. Most flagship/high end Samsung's have
lost the headphone jack.
But that is not what Arno claimed.
The same link I posted cites as second choice the Asus Zenfone 10,
with a price of $700...$750, which is not low end, or the Asus ROG
Phone 7 at $1000..$1400, or the Sony Xperia 1 V at $1400.
I could care less.
The main point is Android is not universally
available with the jack. Samsung recognizes it's a non-issue in
up-market phones.
And of course there are plenty of headphone options whether wired or
wireless for phones w/o jacks.
The same link I posted cites as second choice the Asus Zenfone 10,
with a price of $700...$750, which is not low end, or the Asus ROG
Phone 7 at $1000..$1400, or the Sony Xperia 1 V at $1400.
I could care less.
That is not polite.
It's much more like you saying a car that doesn't have any engine at
all (since the items are gone) is more powerful than a car that has
an engine.
In some respects this is a true though. Electric cars with no engine
are more powerful off the line than similar cars with an engine.
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote
The same link I posted cites as second choice the Asus Zenfone 10, with
a price of $700...$750, which is not low end, or the Asus ROG Phone 7 at
$1000..$1400, or the Sony Xperia 1 V at $1400.
I agree with anyone who proposes facts, as only a fool disagrees with facts
(bear in mind, denying facts is _why_ they are fools in the first place).
Most Android models, some of which are expensive Android models, have it.
On 2023-11-16 18:03, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-11-16 09:59, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-16 14:21, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-11-16 05:59, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-16 05:39, Arno Welzel wrote:
Alan, 2023-11-13 22:06:
On 2023-11-13 12:23, Wally J wrote:[...]
My free Samsung Galaxy A32-5G came with all three, and it's a
cheap phone
(which puts to rest the "claim" that Apple does it to lower
phone costs).
A claim I haven't seen anyone make.
And the A32 is also 3 years old. Current Samsung models don't have a >>>>>> headphone jack any longer.
https://www.wired.com/gallery/best-headphone-jack-phones/
*The Best Phones With an Actual Headphone Jack*
Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
I only needed to search for 30 seconds.
And found a low end Samsung. Most flagship/high end Samsung's have
lost the headphone jack.
But that is not what Arno claimed.
The same link I posted cites as second choice the Asus Zenfone 10,
with a price of $700...$750, which is not low end, or the Asus ROG
Phone 7 at $1000..$1400, or the Sony Xperia 1 V at $1400.
I could care less.
That is not polite.
On 2023-11-16 18:03, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-11-16 09:59, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-16 14:21, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-11-16 05:59, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-16 05:39, Arno Welzel wrote:
Alan, 2023-11-13 22:06:
On 2023-11-13 12:23, Wally J wrote:[...]
My free Samsung Galaxy A32-5G came with all three, and it's a
cheap phone
(which puts to rest the "claim" that Apple does it to lower
phone costs).
A claim I haven't seen anyone make.
And the A32 is also 3 years old. Current Samsung models don't have a >>>>>> headphone jack any longer.
https://www.wired.com/gallery/best-headphone-jack-phones/
*The Best Phones With an Actual Headphone Jack*
Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
I only needed to search for 30 seconds.
And found a low end Samsung. Most flagship/high end Samsung's have
lost the headphone jack.
But that is not what Arno claimed.
The same link I posted cites as second choice the Asus Zenfone 10,
with a price of $700...$750, which is not low end, or the Asus ROG
Phone 7 at $1000..$1400, or the Sony Xperia 1 V at $1400.
I could care less.
That is not polite.
The same link I posted cites as second choice the Asus Zenfone 10,
with a price of $700...$750, which is not low end, or the Asus ROG
Phone 7 at $1000..$1400, or the Sony Xperia 1 V at $1400.
I could care less.
That is not polite.
What is impolite about it?
Android fans bend over to point out that some Android phones still have obsolete headphone jacks. Most people don't care.
Alan Browne wrote on Thu, 16 Nov 2023 21:04:24 -0500 :
The same link I posted cites as second choice the Asus Zenfone 10,
with a price of $700...$750, which is not low end, or the Asus ROG
Phone 7 at $1000..$1400, or the Sony Xperia 1 V at $1400.
I could care less.
That is not polite.
What is impolite about it?
Android fans bend over to point out that some Android phones still have
obsolete headphone jacks. Most people don't care.
What's impolite is you lied to him.
On 11/15/23 8:31 PM, Arno Welzel wrote:
Andrew, 2023-11-13 20:21:
Arno Welzel wrote on Mon, 13 Nov 2023 12:56:14 +0100 :You always carry a mouse and keyboard with your phone? Or a charger?
On 2023-11-13 08:48, Arno Welzel wrote:[...]
One USB-C connector is enough to connect it to a dock which provides >>>>>> power and additional USB ports for peripherials.
That's extra hardware to buy.
Well - a dock to connect mobile devices to stationary peripherials is
not "extra" for me but the most easy way to use the hardware.
You plug in your peripherials and power adapter *once* to the dock and >>>> then you only ever need exaclt *one* plug to connect all the stuff to
your table (or laptop etc.).
It's still extra hardware to buy, stock & always carry around with you
for a phone that's supposed to be stuck into your pocket as you move about. >>
I have a battery pack in my purse. The charger is in my car. I'm
unwilling to do anything on my phone that requires a mouse or keyboard EVER.
On 2023-11-16 05:39, Arno Welzel wrote:
Alan, 2023-11-13 22:06:
On 2023-11-13 12:23, Wally J wrote:[...]
My free Samsung Galaxy A32-5G came with all three, and it's a cheap phone >>>> (which puts to rest the "claim" that Apple does it to lower phone costs). >>>A claim I haven't seen anyone make.
And the A32 is also 3 years old. Current Samsung models don't have a
headphone jack any longer.
https://www.wired.com/gallery/best-headphone-jack-phones/
*The Best Phones With an Actual Headphone Jack*
Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
I only needed to search for 30 seconds.
I only needed to search for 30 seconds.
You win - 100 points! Congratulations!!!!
What is impolite about it?
Android fans bend over to point out that some Android phones still have
obsolete headphone jacks. Most people don't care.
What's impolite is you lied to him.
I did not. Do you think anyone wastes time reading complete pages of
linked material on something as banally stupid as 1890's technology on
2023 mobile phones?
Alan Browne wrote on Fri, 17 Nov 2023 08:09:03 -0500 :
What is impolite about it?
Android fans bend over to point out that some Android phones still have >>>> obsolete headphone jacks. Most people don't care.
What's impolite is you lied to him.
I did not. Do you think anyone wastes time reading complete pages of
linked material on something as banally stupid as 1890's technology on
2023 mobile phones?
What's impolite is not only that you lied to him, nor that you kept making
up more lies to hide that you lied, but more that you eventually caved in
to the truth and said you never cared about being correct from the start.
Alan, 2023-11-13 22:06:
On 2023-11-13 12:23, Wally J wrote:[...]
A claim I haven't seen anyone make.
My free Samsung Galaxy A32-5G came with all three, and it's a cheap phone >>> (which puts to rest the "claim" that Apple does it to lower phone costs). >>
And the A32 is also 3 years old. Current Samsung models don't have a headphone jack any longer.
On 2023-11-12 16:20, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
[...]
Indeed. Samsung Android devices don't have a headphone jack and also noMake that *some* Samsung Android devices, probably mainly/only the
SD card slot. And the same applies to Google Pixel and many other vendors. >>
high-end models.
My Galaxy A51 has headphone jack, SD card slot and FM radio. And even
the newest replacement (A54G) still has a SD card slot (USB-C earjack,
no details about FM radio).
So over time these features may be phased out, but rather slowly and
the SD card slot is probably the last to go. (The SD card slot has
become less important because of larger and relatively cheaper Internal
Storage sizes, but not unimportant, especially not at the low end.)
My Motorola is dual SIM, but actually instead of a second sim I can put
a memory card. It is either sim or memory card, not both.
My second motorola phone did not mention FM radio, but when I initially cloned it over from my previous phone, the FM radio app was installed
and actually works.
And the A32 is also 3 years old. Current Samsung models don't have a
headphone jack any longer.
Anything Apple does, Samsung eventually copies, even after making fun
of Apple for doing it in the first place. :-)
My second motorola phone did not mention FM radio, but when I initially
cloned it over from my previous phone, the FM radio app was installed
and actually works.
The FM radio app on my mother's previous Samsung phone only works if
you plug in wired ear / headphones because it uses the wire as the
antenna. Her current Samsung phone doesn't have a headphone jack, but I
don't know if it still has the FM radio app (she hasn't and wouldn't
ever use it anyway) - I would guess not.
The result said most Android phones today come not only with the aux slot
but also an FM IC (both of which are required to use the emergency radio).
The result said most Android phones today come not only with the aux slot
but also an FM IC (both of which are required to use the emergency radio).
I have the suspicion that the radio could be re-designed to use the
screen wire on the USB cable instead of the screen wire on the audio jack.
On 11/17/2023 3:21 PM, Your Name wrote:
And the A32 is also 3 years old. Current Samsung models don't have a
headphone jack any longer.
Anything Apple does, Samsung eventually copies, even after making fun
of Apple for doing it in the first place. :-)
You are correct that Samsung copied Apple's marketing strategy of removing the jack so that they could better control how you recovered from the loss.
You didn't say whether you were aware that many Samsung models still have
the jack as it's only some (those that chase Apple strategies) that don't.
It's important to note that people don't flip easily from one ecosystem to the other, so if you want a new Samsung with the jack, plenty will exist.
If you want a new iPhone with the jack, you're screwed.
On 2023-11-17 15:43, Bradley wrote:
On 11/17/2023 3:21 PM, Your Name wrote:
If it's that important to anyone there are nice little adaptors for
Ligthning or USB-C to 3.5 TRRS.
On 2023-11-18 00:27, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-11-17 15:43, Bradley wrote:
On 11/17/2023 3:21 PM, Your Name wrote:
...
If it's that important to anyone there are nice little adaptors for
Ligthning or USB-C to 3.5 TRRS.
That doesn't cover all the features, and is possibly more expensive.
On 2023-11-17 18:35, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-18 00:27, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-11-17 15:43, Bradley wrote:
On 11/17/2023 3:21 PM, Your Name wrote:
...
If it's that important to anyone there are nice little adaptors for
Ligthning or USB-C to 3.5 TRRS.
That doesn't cover all the features, and is possibly more expensive.
Amazon: CAD$8 .. $16.
It's also a niche case that the vast majority of iPhone users don't care about. (Nor do many Android phone users).
On 2023-11-12 21:55:12 +0000, Carlos E. R. said:
On 2023-11-12 16:20, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
[...]
Indeed. Samsung Android devices don't have a headphone jack and also no >>>> SD card slot. And the same applies to Google Pixel and many other vendors. >>>Make that *some* Samsung Android devices, probably mainly/only the
high-end models.
My Galaxy A51 has headphone jack, SD card slot and FM radio. And even
the newest replacement (A54G) still has a SD card slot (USB-C earjack,
no details about FM radio).
So over time these features may be phased out, but rather slowly and
the SD card slot is probably the last to go. (The SD card slot has
become less important because of larger and relatively cheaper Internal
Storage sizes, but not unimportant, especially not at the low end.)
My Motorola is dual SIM, but actually instead of a second sim I can put
a memory card. It is either sim or memory card, not both.
My second motorola phone did not mention FM radio, but when I initially
cloned it over from my previous phone, the FM radio app was installed
and actually works.
The FM radio app on my mother's previous Samsung phone only works if
you plug in wired ear / headphones because it uses the wire as the
antenna. Her current Samsung phone doesn't have a headphone jack, but I
don't know if it still has the FM radio app (she hasn't and wouldn't
ever use it anyway) - I would guess not.
On 2023-11-18 00:43, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-11-17 18:35, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-18 00:27, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-11-17 15:43, Bradley wrote:
On 11/17/2023 3:21 PM, Your Name wrote:
...
If it's that important to anyone there are nice little adaptors for
Ligthning or USB-C to 3.5 TRRS.
That doesn't cover all the features, and is possibly more expensive.
Amazon: CAD$8 .. $16.
It's also a niche case that the vast majority of iPhone users don't
care about. (Nor do many Android phone users).
Cites?
You will surely have surveys to support that, right?
On 2023-11-18 00:43, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-11-17 18:35, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-18 00:27, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-11-17 15:43, Bradley wrote:
On 11/17/2023 3:21 PM, Your Name wrote:
...
If it's that important to anyone there are nice little adaptors for
Ligthning or USB-C to 3.5 TRRS.
That doesn't cover all the features, and is possibly more expensive.
Amazon: CAD$8 .. $16.
It's also a niche case that the vast majority of iPhone users don't
care about. (Nor do many Android phone users).
Cites?
You will surely have surveys to support that, right?
You will surely have surveys to support that, right?
Don't need to. Samsung's marketing department have paved that road
which is why their flagship phones don't support 1890's technology. Or
at least Samsung realized that Apple was right.
The reality is that those who actually need or want a headphone jack on
their smartphone is becoming an increasing minority and the headphone
jack *is* being phased out. Just like the plenty of other tech before
it were phased out (for example, computer floppy disk drives, computer
CD drives, etc.).
On 2023-11-17 22:22, Wally J wrote:
...
The result said most Android phones today come not only with the aux slot
but also an FM IC (both of which are required to use the emergency
radio).
I have the suspicion that the radio could be re-designed to use the
screen wire on the USB cable instead of the screen wire on the audio jack.
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
I only needed to search for 30 seconds.
You win - 100 points! Congratulations!!!!
Instead of blurting childish insults why not just apologize for being wrong and for not thinking before you posted what you posted about aux ports?
On 11/17/2023 3:21 PM, Your Name wrote:
And the A32 is also 3 years old. Current Samsung models don't have a
headphone jack any longer.
Anything Apple does, Samsung eventually copies, even after making fun
of Apple for doing it in the first place. :-)
You are correct that Samsung copied Apple's marketing strategy of removing the jack so that they could better control how you recovered from the loss.
You didn't say whether you were aware that many Samsung models still have
the jack as it's only some (those that chase Apple strategies) that don't.
On 2023-11-18 00:27, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-11-17 15:43, Bradley wrote:
On 11/17/2023 3:21 PM, Your Name wrote:
...
If it's that important to anyone there are nice little adaptors for
Ligthning or USB-C to 3.5 TRRS.
That doesn't cover all the features, and is possibly more expensive.
<https://cellularnews.com/digital-wallet/people-dont-care-about-the-headphone-jack-in-smartphones-survey/#conclusion>
Your Name, 2023-11-18 04:23:
[...]
<https://cellularnews.com/digital-wallet/people-dont-care-about-the-headphone-jack-in-smartphones-survey/#conclusion>
Quote:
"In conclusion, the survey results indicate that people's attitudes
towards the absence of the headphone jack in smartphones have evolved
over time. While there may have been initial resistance and frustration,
the majority of users have adapted to the alternative options provided
by manufacturers such as Bluetooth headphones and USB-C adapters."
Hmm... I remember, when I talked about "marketing" in this group and
that manufacturers also influence what people buy, I was told, that this
is not true and people will always only buy what they want ;-).
Bradley, 2023-11-17 21:43:
On 11/17/2023 3:21 PM, Your Name wrote:
And the A32 is also 3 years old. Current Samsung models don't have a
headphone jack any longer.
Anything Apple does, Samsung eventually copies, even after making fun
of Apple for doing it in the first place. :-)
You are correct that Samsung copied Apple's marketing strategy of removing >> the jack so that they could better control how you recovered from the loss. >>
You didn't say whether you were aware that many Samsung models still have
the jack as it's only some (those that chase Apple strategies) that don't.
Depends on how you define "many Samsung models". Very cheap models
maybe. But even the A54 does not have it even though it is not a high
end model.
Your Name, 2023-11-18 04:23:
[...]
<https://cellularnews.com/digital-wallet/people-dont-care-about-the-headphone-jack-in-smartphones-survey/#conclusion>
Quote:
"In conclusion, the survey results indicate that people's attitudes
towards the absence of the headphone jack in smartphones have evolved
over time. While there may have been initial resistance and frustration,
the majority of users have adapted to the alternative options provided
by manufacturers such as Bluetooth headphones and USB-C adapters."
Hmm... I remember, when I talked about "marketing" in this group and
that manufacturers also influence what people buy, I was told, that this
is not true and people will always only buy what they want ;-).
Your Name, 2023-11-18 04:23:
[...]
<https://cellularnews.com/digital-wallet/people-dont-care-about-the-headphone-jack-in-smartphones-survey/#conclusion>
Quote:
"In conclusion, the survey results indicate that people's attitudes
towards the absence of the headphone jack in smartphones have evolved
over time. While there may have been initial resistance and frustration,
the majority of users have adapted to the alternative options provided
by manufacturers such as Bluetooth headphones and USB-C adapters."
Hmm... I remember, when I talked about "marketing" in this group and
that manufacturers also influence what people buy, I was told, that this
is not true and people will always only buy what they want ;-).
Meanwhile, even with lessening
functionality, the price of the cellphone keeps rising.
On 2023-11-20 18:52:34 +0000, Arno Welzel said:
Your Name, 2023-11-18 04:23:
[...]
<https://cellularnews.com/digital-wallet/people-dont-care-about-the-headphone-jack-in-smartphones-survey/#conclusion>
Quote:
"In conclusion, the survey results indicate that people's attitudes
towards the absence of the headphone jack in smartphones have evolved
over time. While there may have been initial resistance and frustration,
the majority of users have adapted to the alternative options provided
by manufacturers such as Bluetooth headphones and USB-C adapters."
Hmm... I remember, when I talked about "marketing" in this group and
that manufacturers also influence what people buy, I was told, that this
is not true and people will always only buy what they want ;-).
Manufacturers certainly *push* buyers, simply because there is little
other choice of what to buy. Often the manufacturers listen to idiots in
the "fashion trends" companies, for example this year's colour choices
for cars are usually based on what some "fashion trend" numbnut said
three years ago would be popular now.
Did any buyers actually say "we don't want floppy disk drives"? Nope.
Apple decided they were "old tech" and removed the drives (and at the
time there was little other way to cheapily transfer files around!) and
all the other companies slowly followed that lead.
Did any buyers say "we do want 8K TVs"? Nope, the makers decided we did,
even though no TV network on the planet was broadcasting 8K TV shows.
Same with pretty much all the other technology changes.
That "pushing" of the buyers is of course partly a marketing scheme to
keep stupid people buying the "latest and greatest" new toy on the
block, even when they've already got a perfectly fine older toy that
does everything they need it to.
And that is what Apple were looking at: the need for better storage than floppies.
On 2023-11-20 10:52, Arno Welzel wrote:
Your Name, 2023-11-18 04:23:
[...]
<https://cellularnews.com/digital-wallet/people-dont-care-about-the-headphone-jack-in-smartphones-survey/#conclusion>
Quote:
"In conclusion, the survey results indicate that people's attitudes
towards the absence of the headphone jack in smartphones have evolved
over time. While there may have been initial resistance and frustration,
the majority of users have adapted to the alternative options provided
by manufacturers such as Bluetooth headphones and USB-C adapters."
Hmm... I remember, when I talked about "marketing" in this group and
that manufacturers also influence what people buy, I was told, that this
is not true and people will always only buy what they want ;-).
No one ever told you that marketing doesn't INFLUENCE people.
On 2023-11-20 13:52, Arno Welzel wrote:
Your Name, 2023-11-18 04:23:
[...]
<https://cellularnews.com/digital-wallet/people-dont-care-about-the-headphone-jack-in-smartphones-survey/#conclusion>
Quote:
"In conclusion, the survey results indicate that people's attitudes
towards the absence of the headphone jack in smartphones have evolved
over time. While there may have been initial resistance and frustration,
the majority of users have adapted to the alternative options provided
by manufacturers such as Bluetooth headphones and USB-C adapters."
Hmm... I remember, when I talked about "marketing" in this group and
that manufacturers also influence what people buy, I was told, that this
is not true and people will always only buy what they want ;-).
Marketer's goal is to sell. If they deem their product doesn't need a feature to sell, then they're happy to eliminate it. If they make
mistakes they lose money. Last I looked Apple is making oodles.
What you were told, I believe, is actually "nobody is forcing you to buy anything."
If a smartphone with a 1890's technology headphone jack is high on your
list nobody is stopping you.
On 2023-11-20 16:55, Your Name wrote:[...]
That "pushing" of the buyers is of course partly a marketing scheme to
keep stupid people buying the "latest and greatest" new toy on the
block, even when they've already got a perfectly fine older toy that
does everything they need it to.
Not really. While DVD is fine for some movies, BluRay is much crisper
for movies that need that level of detail. We'll probably get a 4K tv
within a few years ...
With the headphone jack no longer there and no wired headphones /
earbuds, it becomes difficult to have a suitable antenna, so the FM
radio function disappears as well. Meanwhile, even with lessening functionality, the price of the cellphone keeps rising.
The reality is that those who want wired headphones / earbuds are in
the minority (and shrinking), so the technology is fading away.
Marketer's goal is to sell.
If they deem their product doesn't need a
feature to sell, then they're happy to eliminate it.
If they make
mistakes they lose money. Last I looked Apple is making oodles.
What you were told, I believe, is actually "nobody is forcing you to buy anything."
If a smartphone with a 1890's technology headphone jack is high on your
list nobody is stopping you.
I have a *lot* of additional functionality in my smartphone even without headphone jack. Software and infrastructure are key here, not old
fashioned hardware. Often I only need my smartphone to use public
transport, pay for stuff I purchased at the grocery store. This was not possible 10 years ago. A headphone jack would not help with that either.
Alan Browne, 2023-11-20 22:45:
On 2023-11-20 13:52, Arno Welzel wrote:
Your Name, 2023-11-18 04:23:
[...]
<https://cellularnews.com/digital-wallet/people-dont-care-about-the-headphone-jack-in-smartphones-survey/#conclusion>
Quote:
"In conclusion, the survey results indicate that people's attitudes
towards the absence of the headphone jack in smartphones have evolved
over time. While there may have been initial resistance and frustration, >>> the majority of users have adapted to the alternative options provided
by manufacturers such as Bluetooth headphones and USB-C adapters."
Hmm... I remember, when I talked about "marketing" in this group and
that manufacturers also influence what people buy, I was told, that this >>> is not true and people will always only buy what they want ;-).
Marketer's goal is to sell. If they deem their product doesn't need a
feature to sell, then they're happy to eliminate it. If they make
mistakes they lose money. Last I looked Apple is making oodles.
What you were told, I believe, is actually "nobody is forcing you to buy
anything."
If a smartphone with a 1890's technology headphone jack is high on your
list nobody is stopping you.
No - but a company will also not provide that feature just because you,
as a single customer, ask them to do so.
So if Apple and Samsung decided that certain phones will only be sold
without headphone jacks, they won't change that, even if some people
complain about this or angry write blog posts or tweets ("Xs" now?)
about that.
Alan Browne, 2023-11-21 01:00:
On 2023-11-20 16:55, Your Name wrote:[...]
That "pushing" of the buyers is of course partly a marketing scheme to
keep stupid people buying the "latest and greatest" new toy on the
block, even when they've already got a perfectly fine older toy that
does everything they need it to.
Not really. While DVD is fine for some movies, BluRay is much crisper
for movies that need that level of detail. We'll probably get a 4K tv
within a few years ...
We *have* "4K TV" if you define "TV" as online streaming. And BluRay is already nearly dead like all optical media.
Yes, the share of UHD is growing within the market for optical media,
but the whole optical media market is shrinking.
On 25/11/2023, Arno Welzel wrote:
I have a *lot* of additional functionality in my smartphone even without
headphone jack. Software and infrastructure are key here, not old
fashioned hardware. Often I only need my smartphone to use public
transport, pay for stuff I purchased at the grocery store. This was not
possible 10 years ago. A headphone jack would not help with that either.
It's right when it's said a phone without the jack is less capable than the phone was with the jack because removing the jack only removes capability.
For you to claim otherwise is absurd.
Eliminating a function doesn't mean other functionality isn't increasing.
The function (using headphones) remains present (whether wired or wireless).
if Apple and Samsung decided that certain phones will only be sold
without headphone jacks, they won't change that, even if some people
complain about this or angry write blog posts or tweets ("Xs" now?)
about that.
Alan Browne, 2023-11-21 01:00:
On 2023-11-20 16:55, Your Name wrote:[...]
That "pushing" of the buyers is of course partly a marketing scheme to
keep stupid people buying the "latest and greatest" new toy on the
block, even when they've already got a perfectly fine older toy that
does everything they need it to.
Not really. While DVD is fine for some movies, BluRay is much crisper
for movies that need that level of detail. We'll probably get a 4K tv
within a few years ...
We *have* "4K TV" if you define "TV" as online streaming. And BluRay is already nearly dead like all optical media.
Yes, the share of UHD is growing within the market for optical media,
but the whole optical media market is shrinking.
Alan Browne, 2023-11-20 22:45:
On 2023-11-20 13:52, Arno Welzel wrote:
Your Name, 2023-11-18 04:23:
[...]
<https://cellularnews.com/digital-wallet/people-dont-care-about-the-headphone-jack-in-smartphones-survey/#conclusion>
Quote:
"In conclusion, the survey results indicate that people's attitudes
towards the absence of the headphone jack in smartphones have evolved
over time. While there may have been initial resistance and frustration, >>> the majority of users have adapted to the alternative options provided
by manufacturers such as Bluetooth headphones and USB-C adapters."
Hmm... I remember, when I talked about "marketing" in this group and
that manufacturers also influence what people buy, I was told, that this >>> is not true and people will always only buy what they want ;-).
Marketer's goal is to sell. If they deem their product doesn't need a
feature to sell, then they're happy to eliminate it. If they make
mistakes they lose money. Last I looked Apple is making oodles.
What you were told, I believe, is actually "nobody is forcing you to buy
anything."
If a smartphone with a 1890's technology headphone jack is high on your
list nobody is stopping you.
No - but a company will also not provide that feature just because you,
as a single customer, ask them to do so.
So if Apple and Samsung decided that certain phones will only be sold
without headphone jacks, they won't change that, even if some people
complain about this or angry write blog posts or tweets ("Xs" now?)
about that.
Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote
The reality is that those who want wired headphones / earbuds are in
the minority (and shrinking), so the technology is fading away.
Minority?
WTF?
How can you say that when almost all Android models have headphone jacks?
Alan, 2023-11-20 20:07:
On 2023-11-20 10:52, Arno Welzel wrote:
Your Name, 2023-11-18 04:23:
[...]
<https://cellularnews.com/digital-wallet/people-dont-care-about-the-headphone-jack-in-smartphones-survey/#conclusion>
Quote:
"In conclusion, the survey results indicate that people's attitudes
towards the absence of the headphone jack in smartphones have evolved
over time. While there may have been initial resistance and frustration, >>> the majority of users have adapted to the alternative options provided
by manufacturers such as Bluetooth headphones and USB-C adapters."
Hmm... I remember, when I talked about "marketing" in this group and
that manufacturers also influence what people buy, I was told, that this >>> is not true and people will always only buy what they want ;-).
No one ever told you that marketing doesn't INFLUENCE people.
Well - *influencing* people will change their decisions and thus they
gonna buy what manufacturers want them to buy.
On 25/11/2023, Arno Welzel wrote:
I have a *lot* of additional functionality in my smartphone even without
headphone jack. Software and infrastructure are key here, not old
fashioned hardware. Often I only need my smartphone to use public
transport, pay for stuff I purchased at the grocery store. This was not
possible 10 years ago. A headphone jack would not help with that either.
It's right when it's said a phone without the jack is less capable than the phone was with the jack because removing the jack only removes capability.
For you to claim otherwise is absurd.
Alan Browne, 2023-11-20 22:45:
On 2023-11-20 13:52, Arno Welzel wrote:
Your Name, 2023-11-18 04:23:
[...]
<https://cellularnews.com/digital-wallet/people-dont-care-about-the-headphone-jack-in-smartphones-survey/#conclusion>
Quote:
"In conclusion, the survey results indicate that people's attitudes
towards the absence of the headphone jack in smartphones have evolved
over time. While there may have been initial resistance and frustration, >>> the majority of users have adapted to the alternative options provided
by manufacturers such as Bluetooth headphones and USB-C adapters."
Hmm... I remember, when I talked about "marketing" in this group and
that manufacturers also influence what people buy, I was told, that this >>> is not true and people will always only buy what they want ;-).
Marketer's goal is to sell. If they deem their product doesn't need a
feature to sell, then they're happy to eliminate it. If they make
mistakes they lose money. Last I looked Apple is making oodles.
What you were told, I believe, is actually "nobody is forcing you to buy
anything."
If a smartphone with a 1890's technology headphone jack is high on your
list nobody is stopping you.
No - but a company will also not provide that feature just because you,
as a single customer, ask them to do so.
So if Apple and Samsung decided that certain phones will only be sold
without headphone jacks, they won't change that, even if some people
complain about this or angry write blog posts or tweets ("Xs" now?)
about that.
1890 says "hi!"
On 11/25/2023 10:11 AM, Alan Browne wrote:
1890 says "hi!"
You're just embarrassed that your iPhone can't do what most phones can.
On 11/25/2023 10:11 AM, Alan Browne wrote:
1890 says "hi!"
You're just embarrassed that your iPhone can't do what most phones can.
On 2023-11-20 16:55, Your Name wrote:
On 2023-11-20 18:52:34 +0000, Arno Welzel said:
Your Name, 2023-11-18 04:23:
Did any buyers say "we do want 8K TVs"? Nope, the makers decided we
did, even though no TV network on the planet was broadcasting 8K TV
shows.
4K is pretty much the practical limit for the vast majority of homes.
(I'm still on my 1080p plasma from ca. 2005).
Same with pretty much all the other technology changes.
That "pushing" of the buyers is of course partly a marketing scheme to
keep stupid people buying the "latest and greatest" new toy on the
block, even when they've already got a perfectly fine older toy that
does everything they need it to.
Not really. While DVD is fine for some movies, BluRay is much crisper
for movies that need that level of detail. We'll probably get a 4K tv within a few years ...
On 2023-11-25 11:58:04 +0000, Arno Welzel said:
Alan Browne, 2023-11-20 22:45:
On 2023-11-20 13:52, Arno Welzel wrote:
Your Name, 2023-11-18 04:23:
So if Apple and Samsung decided that certain phones will only be sold
without headphone jacks, they won't change that, even if some people
complain about this or angry write blog posts or tweets ("Xs" now?)
about that.
Not quite true, companies do reverse decisions, but it depends on how
many that "some people" actually is.
For example, Apple changed the top row of the keyboard on some of their laptops from regular function keys to a silly "Touchbar" screen. Most
people either hated it or didn't care, and Apple has now dropped the "feature" and put back regular function keys.
Apple created the "trashcan" Mac Pro. Many people hated it and Apple eventually replaced it with the standard (if rather ugly "cheesegrater") mini-tower Mac Pro.
Here in New Zealand, a few years ago the Cadbury company started using
palm oil in their chocolate bars. It was hated by most people, so the
company swapped back.
The relaity is that people actually wanting a headphone jack on their smartphone is a niche market, and the big companies do not bother with
niche markets. Those few people that do want a headphone jack can simply
add one with an adaptor - why should everyone else pay the extra 25c on
the product price to include a socket they will never use?
On 2023-11-21 01:00, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-11-20 16:55, Your Name wrote:
On 2023-11-20 18:52:34 +0000, Arno Welzel said:
Your Name, 2023-11-18 04:23:
...
Did any buyers say "we do want 8K TVs"? Nope, the makers decided we
did, even though no TV network on the planet was broadcasting 8K TV
shows.
4K is pretty much the practical limit for the vast majority of homes.
(I'm still on my 1080p plasma from ca. 2005).
Same with pretty much all the other technology changes.
That "pushing" of the buyers is of course partly a marketing scheme
to keep stupid people buying the "latest and greatest" new toy on the
block, even when they've already got a perfectly fine older toy that
does everything they need it to.
Not really. While DVD is fine for some movies, BluRay is much crisper
for movies that need that level of detail. We'll probably get a 4K tv
within a few years ...
Blue ray is not selling much.
Carlos E. R., 2023-11-18 00:35:
On 2023-11-18 00:27, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-11-17 15:43, Bradley wrote:
On 11/17/2023 3:21 PM, Your Name wrote:
...
If it's that important to anyone there are nice little adaptors for
Ligthning or USB-C to 3.5 TRRS.
That doesn't cover all the features, and is possibly more expensive.
Yes, FM radio does not work that way - but phones without a headphone
jack don't have FM radio anyway. And charging while listening to music
also needs another adapter if you can not use wireless charging instead.
Anything else?
On 2023-11-26 10:17, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-21 01:00, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-11-20 16:55, Your Name wrote:
On 2023-11-20 18:52:34 +0000, Arno Welzel said:
Your Name, 2023-11-18 04:23:
...
Did any buyers say "we do want 8K TVs"? Nope, the makers decided we
did, even though no TV network on the planet was broadcasting 8K TV
shows.
4K is pretty much the practical limit for the vast majority of homes.
(I'm still on my 1080p plasma from ca. 2005).
Same with pretty much all the other technology changes.
That "pushing" of the buyers is of course partly a marketing scheme
to keep stupid people buying the "latest and greatest" new toy on
the block, even when they've already got a perfectly fine older toy
that does everything they need it to.
Not really. While DVD is fine for some movies, BluRay is much
crisper for movies that need that level of detail. We'll probably
get a 4K tv within a few years ...
Blue ray is not selling much.
But it is definitely selling. There aren't many movies I buy to keep,
but the few I deem "worth it" are always available in BR.
And now, if I'm eventually going to get a 4K television (not a high
priority) I'll probably by 4K versions going forward.
I have a dvd writer on my computer, but getting media is becoming
difficult.
On 2023-11-25 21:42, Your Name wrote:
The relaity is that people actually wanting a headphone jack on their
smartphone is a niche market, and the big companies do not bother with
niche markets. Those few people that do want a headphone jack can
simply add one with an adaptor - why should everyone else pay the
extra 25c on the product price to include a socket they will never use?
A company selling stuff to niche customers can actually maker rich, they don't have competition.
On 2023-11-20 19:47, Arno Welzel wrote:
Carlos E. R., 2023-11-18 00:35:
On 2023-11-18 00:27, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-11-17 15:43, Bradley wrote:
On 11/17/2023 3:21 PM, Your Name wrote:
...
If it's that important to anyone there are nice little adaptors for
Ligthning or USB-C to 3.5 TRRS.
That doesn't cover all the features, and is possibly more expensive.
Yes, FM radio does not work that way - but phones without a headphone
jack don't have FM radio anyway. And charging while listening to music
also needs another adapter if you can not use wireless charging instead.
Remember I said phones should have two usb connectors?
On 2023-11-26 10:40, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-25 21:42, Your Name wrote:
The relaity is that people actually wanting a headphone jack on their
smartphone is a niche market, and the big companies do not bother
with niche markets. Those few people that do want a headphone jack
can simply add one with an adaptor - why should everyone else pay the
extra 25c on the product price to include a socket they will never use?
A company selling stuff to niche customers can actually maker rich,
they don't have competition.
I looked. Apple are not in that market space.
On 2023-11-26 10:28, Carlos E. R. wrote:
I have a dvd writer on my computer, but getting media is becoming
difficult.
Local Staples lists 6 varieties of Verbatim BD-R disc packages of 10 -
25 discs (of which 2 are in-store/in-stock and 4 can be ordered).
And the usual suspect has several brands, ea. with a variety of packages deliverable next day or within days.
On 2023-11-26 11:07, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-20 19:47, Arno Welzel wrote:
Carlos E. R., 2023-11-18 00:35:
On 2023-11-18 00:27, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-11-17 15:43, Bradley wrote:
On 11/17/2023 3:21 PM, Your Name wrote:
...
If it's that important to anyone there are nice little adaptors for
Ligthning or USB-C to 3.5 TRRS.
That doesn't cover all the features, and is possibly more expensive.
Yes, FM radio does not work that way - but phones without a headphone
jack don't have FM radio anyway. And charging while listening to music
also needs another adapter if you can not use wireless charging instead.
Remember I said phones should have two usb connectors?
I run into this situation where my charge is low and I want to use my
wired earphones on a long call.
I bought a wireless charger a couple years ago to conduct efficiency
tests. And it does come in handy once a month or so to charge the phone while I'm on such calls.
You can buy a dongle that will permit 2 Lightning connections (one data,
1 audio) to 1 Lightning port. They're on the order of $10. I assume
such will emerge (if not already) for USB-C.
On 2023-11-26 17:26, Alan Browne wrote:
You can buy a dongle that will permit 2 Lightning connections (one data,
1 audio) to 1 Lightning port. They're on the order of $10. I assume
such will emerge (if not already) for USB-C.
My phone doesn't charge wirelessly.
You just reminded me that some cars come with a wireless charger. My car doesn't even have an specific place to put the phone, which is a
nuisance because the phone has to be connected to the car; instead of
GPS it has a touch screen with some hidden LG box that connects to the
phone by USB, and then the phone provides the GPS map instead. Android
Auto, or the equivalent for Apple, the car supports both.
But no place to put the phone safely.
On 2023-11-26 16:23, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-11-26 10:17, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-21 01:00, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-11-20 16:55, Your Name wrote:
On 2023-11-20 18:52:34 +0000, Arno Welzel said:
Your Name, 2023-11-18 04:23:
...
Did any buyers say "we do want 8K TVs"? Nope, the makers decided we
did, even though no TV network on the planet was broadcasting 8K TV
shows.
4K is pretty much the practical limit for the vast majority of homes.
(I'm still on my 1080p plasma from ca. 2005).
Same with pretty much all the other technology changes.
That "pushing" of the buyers is of course partly a marketing scheme to >>>>> keep stupid people buying the "latest and greatest" new toy on the
block, even when they've already got a perfectly fine older toy that >>>>> does everything they need it to.
Not really. While DVD is fine for some movies, BluRay is much crisper >>>> for movies that need that level of detail. We'll probably get a 4K tv >>>> within a few years ...
Blue ray is not selling much.
But it is definitely selling. There aren't many movies I buy to keep,
but the few I deem "worth it" are always available in BR.
I have a dvd writer on my computer, but getting media is becoming difficult.
On 2023-11-25 21:42, Your Name wrote:
On 2023-11-25 11:58:04 +0000, Arno Welzel said:
Alan Browne, 2023-11-20 22:45:
On 2023-11-20 13:52, Arno Welzel wrote:
Your Name, 2023-11-18 04:23:
...
So if Apple and Samsung decided that certain phones will only be sold
without headphone jacks, they won't change that, even if some people
complain about this or angry write blog posts or tweets ("Xs" now?)
about that.
Not quite true, companies do reverse decisions, but it depends on how
many that "some people" actually is.
For example, Apple changed the top row of the keyboard on some of their
laptops from regular function keys to a silly "Touchbar" screen. Most
people either hated it or didn't care, and Apple has now dropped the
"feature" and put back regular function keys.
Apple created the "trashcan" Mac Pro. Many people hated it and Apple
eventually replaced it with the standard (if rather ugly
"cheesegrater") mini-tower Mac Pro.
Here in New Zealand, a few years ago the Cadbury company started using
palm oil in their chocolate bars. It was hated by most people, so the
company swapped back.
The relaity is that people actually wanting a headphone jack on their
smartphone is a niche market, and the big companies do not bother with
niche markets. Those few people that do want a headphone jack can
simply add one with an adaptor - why should everyone else pay the extra
25c on the product price to include a socket they will never use?
A company selling stuff to niche customers can actually maker rich,
they don't have competition.
I only needed to search for 30 seconds.
You win - 100 points! Congratulations!!!!
Instead of blurting childish insults why not just apologize for being wrong >> and for not thinking before you posted what you posted about aux ports?
"You win" is not enough?
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
I only needed to search for 30 seconds.
You win - 100 points! Congratulations!!!!
Instead of blurting childish insults why not just apologize for being wrong >>> and for not thinking before you posted what you posted about aux ports?
"You win" is not enough?
Whatever you say is "enough" if you get into your thick skull that most Android models sold today have the very useful ports, slots & radios.
I was not referring to Apple at all.
On 2023-11-26 17:18, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-11-26 10:40, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-25 21:42, Your Name wrote:
The relaity is that people actually wanting a headphone jack on
their smartphone is a niche market, and the big companies do not
bother with niche markets. Those few people that do want a headphone
jack can simply add one with an adaptor - why should everyone else
pay the extra 25c on the product price to include a socket they will
never use?
A company selling stuff to niche customers can actually maker rich,
they don't have competition.
I looked. Apple are not in that market space.
I was not referring to Apple at all.
As usual Apple lead these "exclusions" and others follow. Within a few
more years (if that long) I doubt any smartphones will have audio jacks, memory cards or FM receivers. Though the latter might hang in there
just because it is a subset of an existing chip feature set.
On 11/26/23 11:36 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
But no place to put the phone safely.
I can put mine in the center cupholder, but I can't actually see it
there -- it just keeps it off the floor. There is NO flat surface in
the Corolla, and the upper dashboard surface has a pebble grain so I
can't use a suction cup. And only ONE cig lighter.
I swear, whoever designs car interiors saves the good stuff for the high-price versions. I wish I had Android Auto, but not enough to buy a
new 'entertainment unit'.
On 2023-11-26 17:26, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-11-26 11:07, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-20 19:47, Arno Welzel wrote:
Carlos E. R., 2023-11-18 00:35:
On 2023-11-18 00:27, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-11-17 15:43, Bradley wrote:
On 11/17/2023 3:21 PM, Your Name wrote:
...
If it's that important to anyone there are nice little adaptors for >>>>>> Ligthning or USB-C to 3.5 TRRS.
That doesn't cover all the features, and is possibly more expensive.
Yes, FM radio does not work that way - but phones without a headphone
jack don't have FM radio anyway. And charging while listening to music >>>> also needs another adapter if you can not use wireless charging
instead.
Remember I said phones should have two usb connectors?
I run into this situation where my charge is low and I want to use my
wired earphones on a long call.
I bought a wireless charger a couple years ago to conduct efficiency
tests. And it does come in handy once a month or so to charge the
phone while I'm on such calls.
You can buy a dongle that will permit 2 Lightning connections (one
data, 1 audio) to 1 Lightning port. They're on the order of $10. I
assume such will emerge (if not already) for USB-C.
My phone doesn't charge wirelessly.
You just reminded me that some cars come with a wireless charger. My car doesn't even have an specific place to put the phone, which is a
nuisance because the phone has to be connected to the car; instead of
GPS it has a touch screen with some hidden LG box that connects to the
phone by USB, and then the phone provides the GPS map instead. Android
Auto, or the equivalent for Apple, the car supports both.
But no place to put the phone safely.
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
As usual Apple lead these "exclusions" and others follow. Within a few
more years (if that long) I doubt any smartphones will have audio jacks,
memory cards or FM receivers. Though the latter might hang in there
just because it is a subset of an existing chip feature set.
Be careful about your false statistics because it's obvious that some OEMs follow Apple (who wouldn't want to make all that money off people).
But most do not follow Apple.
And even the ones that do follow Apple, give users the choice.
It's like Apple makes every car without a trunk, telling you it's
courageous that you have to figure out on your own how to carry the
groceries - and you buy all sorts of contraptions for the roof of your car
to carry your groceries. Then you claim that contraption is "progress."
Then some companies follow Apple by building cars without trunks.
But those companies also create models that have the trunk.
So the user has a choice of a car with or without the trunk.
But not with Apple.
With Apple, you have no choice. You only get a car without the trunk.
Not the same thing as having the choice. Not even close to the same thing.
Have you [Carlos] found a USB-C adaptor cable with 3 connectors (1
for the phone, 1 for "data/power" one for audio (phones))?
With Apple, you have no choice. You only get a car without the trunk.
Not the same thing as having the choice. Not even close to the same thing.
Continued fabricated fantastic idiotic fake comparison.
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
As usual Apple lead these "exclusions" and others follow. Within a few
more years (if that long) I doubt any smartphones will have audio jacks,
memory cards or FM receivers. Though the latter might hang in there
just because it is a subset of an existing chip feature set.
Be careful about your false statistics because it's obvious that some OEMs follow Apple (who wouldn't want to make all that money off people).
But most do not follow Apple.
And even the ones that do follow Apple, give users the choice.
It's like Apple makes every car without a trunk, telling you it's
courageous that you have to figure out on your own how to carry the
groceries - and you buy all sorts of contraptions for the roof of your car
to carry your groceries. Then you claim that contraption is "progress."
Then some companies follow Apple by building cars without trunks.
But those companies also create models that have the trunk.
So the user has a choice of a car with or without the trunk.
But not with Apple.
With Apple, you have no choice. You only get a car without the trunk.
Not the same thing as having the choice. Not even close to the same thing.
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
With Apple, you have no choice. You only get a car without the trunk.
Not the same thing as having the choice. Not even close to the same thing. >>Continued fabricated fantastic idiotic fake comparison.
You constantly claimed that by spending extra for a rooftop carrier for
your groceries that it's better than a trunk because you have no trunk.
Your claim that "a trunk is so 1890s" is your excuse for not having one.
On 2023-11-26 14:36, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-26 17:26, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-11-26 11:07, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-20 19:47, Arno Welzel wrote:
Carlos E. R., 2023-11-18 00:35:
On 2023-11-18 00:27, Alan Browne wrote:Yes, FM radio does not work that way - but phones without a headphone >>>>> jack don't have FM radio anyway. And charging while listening to music >>>>> also needs another adapter if you can not use wireless charging
On 2023-11-17 15:43, Bradley wrote:
On 11/17/2023 3:21 PM, Your Name wrote:
...
If it's that important to anyone there are nice little adaptors for >>>>>>> Ligthning or USB-C to 3.5 TRRS.
That doesn't cover all the features, and is possibly more expensive. >>>>>
instead.
Remember I said phones should have two usb connectors?
I run into this situation where my charge is low and I want to use my
wired earphones on a long call.
I bought a wireless charger a couple years ago to conduct efficiency
tests. And it does come in handy once a month or so to charge the
phone while I'm on such calls.
You can buy a dongle that will permit 2 Lightning connections (one
data, 1 audio) to 1 Lightning port. They're on the order of $10. I
assume such will emerge (if not already) for USB-C.
My phone doesn't charge wirelessly.
Have you found a USB-C adaptor cable with 3 connectors (1 for the phone,
1 for "data/power" one for audio (phones))?
On 2023-11-26 14:58, Peter wrote:
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
"You win" is not enough?I only needed to search for 30 seconds.
You win - 100 points! Congratulations!!!!
Instead of blurting childish insults why not just apologize for
being wrong
and for not thinking before you posted what you posted about aux ports? >>>
Whatever you say is "enough" if you get into your thick skull that most
Android models sold today have the very useful ports, slots & radios.
But what percentage of people USE those ports?
On 2023-11-26 19:41, Peter wrote:
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
As usual Apple lead these "exclusions" and others follow. Within a few >>> more years (if that long) I doubt any smartphones will have audio jacks, >>> memory cards or FM receivers. Though the latter might hang in there
just because it is a subset of an existing chip feature set.
Be careful about your false statistics because it's obvious that some
OEMs
follow Apple (who wouldn't want to make all that money off people).
What statistics? Do you read what you write? (Rhetorical).
But most do not follow Apple.
And even the ones that do follow Apple, give users the choice.
Apple have no trouble selling their wares. And when they drop things, others soon follow.
It's like Apple makes every car without a trunk, telling you it's
courageous that you have to figure out on your own how to carry the
groceries - and you buy all sorts of contraptions for the roof of your
car
to carry your groceries. Then you claim that contraption is "progress."
Idiotic fake comparison.
Then some companies follow Apple by building cars without trunks.
But those companies also create models that have the trunk.
Continued idiotic fake comparison.
So the user has a choice of a car with or without the trunk.
But not with Apple.
Continued fantastic idiotic fake comparison.
With Apple, you have no choice. You only get a car without the trunk.
Not the same thing as having the choice. Not even close to the same
thing.
Continued fabricated fantastic idiotic fake comparison.
(In case you're confused about the word fantastic - it has a common root
with fantasy in the sense of "remote from reality").
On 2023-11-26 14:28, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-26 17:18, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-11-26 10:40, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-25 21:42, Your Name wrote:
The relaity is that people actually wanting a headphone jack on
their smartphone is a niche market, and the big companies do not
bother with niche markets. Those few people that do want a
headphone jack can simply add one with an adaptor - why should
everyone else pay the extra 25c on the product price to include a
socket they will never use?
A company selling stuff to niche customers can actually maker rich,
they don't have competition.
I looked. Apple are not in that market space.
I was not referring to Apple at all.
Of course. How could you.
On 11/26/23 11:36 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-26 17:26, Alan Browne wrote:
You can buy a dongle that will permit 2 Lightning connections (one
data, 1 audio) to 1 Lightning port. They're on the order of $10. I
assume such will emerge (if not already) for USB-C.
My phone doesn't charge wirelessly.
You just reminded me that some cars come with a wireless charger. My car
doesn't even have an specific place to put the phone, which is a
nuisance because the phone has to be connected to the car; instead of
GPS it has a touch screen with some hidden LG box that connects to the
phone by USB, and then the phone provides the GPS map instead. Android
Auto, or the equivalent for Apple, the car supports both.
But no place to put the phone safely.
I can put mine in the center cupholder, but I can't actually see it
there -- it just keeps it off the floor. There is NO flat surface in
the Corolla, and the upper dashboard surface has a pebble grain so I
can't use a suction cup. And only ONE cig lighter.
I swear, whoever designs car interiors saves the good stuff for the high-price versions. I wish I had Android Auto, but not enough to buy a
new 'entertainment unit'.
On 2023-11-26 16:50, Alan Browne wrote:
Have you found a USB-C adaptor cable with 3 connectors (1 for the
phone, 1 for "data/power" one for audio (phones))?
https://www.amazon.ca/s?k=usb-c+charging+and+audio+adapter&hvadid=604664806007&hvdev=c&hvlocphy=9001554&hvnetw=g&hvqmt=e&hvrand=358470888422617783&hvtargid=kwd-807920154713&hydadcr=27621_14575629&tag=googcana-20&ref=pd_sl_2o82gend6g_e
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
With Apple, you have no choice. You only get a car without the trunk.
Not the same thing as having the choice. Not even close to the same thing. >>Continued fabricated fantastic idiotic fake comparison.
You constantly claimed that by spending extra for a rooftop carrier for
your groceries that it's better than a trunk because you have no trunk.
Your claim that "a trunk is so 1890s" is your excuse for not having one.
On 2023-11-26 14:36, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-26 17:26, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-11-26 11:07, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-20 19:47, Arno Welzel wrote:
Carlos E. R., 2023-11-18 00:35:
On 2023-11-18 00:27, Alan Browne wrote:Yes, FM radio does not work that way - but phones without a headphone >>>>> jack don't have FM radio anyway. And charging while listening to music >>>>> also needs another adapter if you can not use wireless charging
On 2023-11-17 15:43, Bradley wrote:
On 11/17/2023 3:21 PM, Your Name wrote:
...
If it's that important to anyone there are nice little adaptors for >>>>>>> Ligthning or USB-C to 3.5 TRRS.
That doesn't cover all the features, and is possibly more expensive. >>>>>
instead.
Remember I said phones should have two usb connectors?
I run into this situation where my charge is low and I want to use my
wired earphones on a long call.
I bought a wireless charger a couple years ago to conduct efficiency
tests. And it does come in handy once a month or so to charge the
phone while I'm on such calls.
You can buy a dongle that will permit 2 Lightning connections (one
data, 1 audio) to 1 Lightning port. They're on the order of $10. I
assume such will emerge (if not already) for USB-C.
My phone doesn't charge wirelessly.
Have you found a USB-C adaptor cable with 3 connectors (1 for the phone,
1 for "data/power" one for audio (phones))?
You just reminded me that some cars come with a wireless charger. My
car doesn't even have an specific place to put the phone, which is a
nuisance because the phone has to be connected to the car; instead of
GPS it has a touch screen with some hidden LG box that connects to the
phone by USB, and then the phone provides the GPS map instead. Android
Auto, or the equivalent for Apple, the car supports both.
But no place to put the phone safely.
I bought a "coffee cup holder" phone holder. You put it where a cup
would go, twist the base control and it tightens in place. Then the
phone goes in a spring loaded bracket up top.
Couple this to a short lightning cable (about 40cm (?)) running back
into centre console hidden USB connectors and it makes for a nice clean, safe, convenient location. Although that cable is showing wear after many years of service.
CarPlay for the rest... (no wireless charger and that's fine with me).
On 2023-11-27 02:02, Alan Browne wrote:
But he is right.
On 2023-11-26 23:59, Alan wrote:
On 2023-11-26 14:58, Peter wrote:
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
I only needed to search for 30 seconds.
You win - 100 points! Congratulations!!!!
Instead of blurting childish insults why not just apologize for
being wrong
and for not thinking before you posted what you posted about aux
ports?
"You win" is not enough?
Whatever you say is "enough" if you get into your thick skull that most
Android models sold today have the very useful ports, slots & radios.
But what percentage of people USE those ports?
What percentage uses any particular feature or app?
Does a feature need to have 90% usage in order not not be removed?
On 2023-11-27 01:43, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-11-26 14:28, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-26 17:18, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-11-26 10:40, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-25 21:42, Your Name wrote:
The relaity is that people actually wanting a headphone jack on
their smartphone is a niche market, and the big companies do not
bother with niche markets. Those few people that do want a
headphone jack can simply add one with an adaptor - why should
everyone else pay the extra 25c on the product price to include a
socket they will never use?
A company selling stuff to niche customers can actually maker rich,
they don't have competition.
I looked. Apple are not in that market space.
I was not referring to Apple at all.
Of course. How could you.
Of course not.
I'm saying that a small company can sell niche products that big
companies neglect, and make rich because they cater to that 10% of
clients that can not buy what they use from the big companies, and by
doing so the small company has no competitors.
Are you that thick? The world doesn't go around Apple, loving Apple or
hating Apple. Have you ever seen me insulting Apple, for instance? I was
not even talking about Apple.
On 2023-11-26 23:59, Alan wrote:
On 2023-11-26 14:58, Peter wrote:
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
I only needed to search for 30 seconds.
You win - 100 points! Congratulations!!!!
Instead of blurting childish insults why not just apologize for
being wrong
and for not thinking before you posted what you posted about aux
ports?
"You win" is not enough?
Whatever you say is "enough" if you get into your thick skull that most
Android models sold today have the very useful ports, slots & radios.
But what percentage of people USE those ports?
What percentage uses any particular feature or app?
Does a feature need to have 90% usage in order not not be removed?
It's like Apple makes every car without a trunk, telling you it's
courageous that you have to figure out on your own how to carry the
groceries - and you buy all sorts of contraptions for the roof of
your car
to carry your groceries. Then you claim that contraption is "progress."
Idiotic fake comparison.
Then some companies follow Apple by building cars without trunks.
But those companies also create models that have the trunk.
Continued idiotic fake comparison.
So the user has a choice of a car with or without the trunk.
But not with Apple.
Continued fantastic idiotic fake comparison.
With Apple, you have no choice. You only get a car without the trunk.
Not the same thing as having the choice. Not even close to the same
thing.
Continued fabricated fantastic idiotic fake comparison.
But he is right.
On 2023-11-26 20:59, Alan wrote:
On 2023-11-26 16:50, Alan Browne wrote:
Have you found a USB-C adaptor cable with 3 connectors (1 for the
phone, 1 for "data/power" one for audio (phones))?
https://www.amazon.ca/s?k=usb-c+charging+and+audio+adapter&hvadid=604664806007&hvdev=c&hvlocphy=9001554&hvnetw=g&hvqmt=e&hvrand=358470888422617783&hvtargid=kwd-807920154713&hydadcr=27621_14575629&tag=googcana-20&ref=pd_sl_2o82gend6g_e
A little too broad, but there is one there called a "USB-C" splitter
which is what I was referring to.
On 2023-11-27 05:53, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-11-26 23:59, Alan wrote:
On 2023-11-26 14:58, Peter wrote:
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
I only needed to search for 30 seconds.
You win - 100 points! Congratulations!!!!
Instead of blurting childish insults why not just apologize for
being wrong
and for not thinking before you posted what you posted about aux
ports?
"You win" is not enough?
Whatever you say is "enough" if you get into your thick skull that most >>> Android models sold today have the very useful ports, slots & radios.
But what percentage of people USE those ports?
What percentage uses any particular feature or app?
Does a feature need to have 90% usage in order not not be removed?
Take data expansion. This means there is unused volume inside from the start. Better to reclaim that (more battery) and sell it with more SSD
from the start. Less parts, more reliable. Seal the phone - better
water resistance.
Take data expansion. This means there is unused volume inside from the start. Better to reclaim that (more battery) and sell it with more SSD
from the start. Less parts, more reliable. Seal the phone - better
water resistance.
Anyway, it's nice to have the option of - *large* - memory expansion, instead of getting stuck with a too small (storage) phone.
But he is right.
He manifestly is not. Apple do not make cars.
On this Mon, 27 Nov 2023 08:18:45 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:
Take data expansion. This means there is unused volume inside from the
start. Better to reclaim that (more battery) and sell it with more SSD
from the start. Less parts, more reliable. Seal the phone - better
water resistance.
Your reasoning is absurd because you don't even know what an sd card does.
And you are making up excuses about "water resistance" because it's absurd.
How are you going to get portable memory with your dinky broken iPhone?
Whatever you say is "enough" if you get into your thick skull that most >>>>> Android models sold today have the very useful ports, slots & radios. >>>>But what percentage of people USE those ports?
What percentage uses any particular feature or app?
Does a feature need to have 90% usage in order not not be removed?
Take data expansion. This means there is unused volume inside from the
start. Better to reclaim that (more battery) and sell it with more SSD
from the start. Less parts, more reliable. Seal the phone - better
water resistance.
No offense, but that's a rather weak argument.
The extra space taken up by a (Micro) SD-card 'tray' is tiny and in
most cases only a small extension of the SIM-card tray.
Yes, more internal storage is good, but that also occupies space and
- *if* available - costs extra money upfront.
It used to cost quite a lot of money upfront, especially on lower end phones. These days, the incremental cost is not that high anymore, but
at the low end, the internal storage was/is quite low. When I bought my current phone three years ago, there were many 16GB phones (and perhaps
even some 8GB ones). Now, there still are some 32GB phones.
Anyway, it's nice to have the option of - *large* - memory expansion, instead of getting stuck with a too small (storage) phone. For *me* -
with my current 128GB phone - not an earth-shaking big deal, but a nice option. For others, with less internal storage or/and other memory
needs, it might be a more-important/essential feature.
Moral: Different strokes for different folks.
Your reasoning is absurd because you don't even know what an sd card does.
Given I have nearly a dozen within reach right here right now, that is
quite the claim.
And you are making up excuses about "water resistance" because it's absurd.
And of course any device that has a "port" or is conveniently opened is
at higher risk of water damage. iPhones on the other hand have great
water resistance and have been demonstrated to exceed their spec for
time and depth by multiples.
How are you going to get portable memory with your dinky broken iPhone?
It is my portable memory. I often encrypted volumes of data at work to
bring home for storage using my iPhone as the data carrier. Quite fast
and convenient esp. using the AirDrop feature on both ends of the transaction.
Show me where I made such a claim.
Otherwise stop doubling down on stupid.
On this Mon, 27 Nov 2023 08:18:45 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:
Take data expansion. This means there is unused volume inside from the
start. Better to reclaim that (more battery) and sell it with more SSD
from the start. Less parts, more reliable. Seal the phone - better
water resistance.
Your reasoning is absurd because you don't even know what an sd card does. And you are making up excuses about "water resistance" because it's absurd.
How are you going to get portable memory with your dinky broken iPhone?
On 11/27/2023 1:41 PM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Anyway, it's nice to have the option of - *large* - memory expansion,
instead of getting stuck with a too small (storage) phone.
As you said, it's nice is you can fill up any inexpensive 512GB card with photos & video & then pop in another card & fill up another 512GB.
And another. And another. And another after that.
But it's also portable.
What no phone can do without the sd card is pop it out of one phone and put it in another phone and have all the data be available to the other phone.
Very useful. The dinky half-baked iPhone can't do anything like that.
But he is right.
He manifestly is not. Apple do not make cars.
On 2023-11-28 00:00:27 +0000, Larry Wolff said:
On this Mon, 27 Nov 2023 08:18:45 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:
Take data expansion. This means there is unused volume inside from the
start. Better to reclaim that (more battery) and sell it with more SSD
from the start. Less parts, more reliable. Seal the phone - better
water resistance.
Your reasoning is absurd because you don't even know what an sd card does. >> And you are making up excuses about "water resistance" because it's absurd. >>
How are you going to get portable memory with your dinky broken iPhone?
It's pretty easy to plug many external drives of various types into an
iPhone these days, which also makes it far easier to transfer files to
other devices than using a fiddly SD card since most computers don't
have SD readers built-in either.
On 11/27/23 7:08 PM, Your Name wrote:
On 2023-11-28 00:00:27 +0000, Larry Wolff said:
On this Mon, 27 Nov 2023 08:18:45 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:
Take data expansion. This means there is unused volume inside from the >>>> start. Better to reclaim that (more battery) and sell it with more SSD >>>> from the start. Less parts, more reliable. Seal the phone - better
water resistance.
Your reasoning is absurd because you don't even know what an sd card does. >>> And you are making up excuses about "water resistance" because it's absurd. >>>
How are you going to get portable memory with your dinky broken iPhone?
It's pretty easy to plug many external drives of various types into an
iPhone these days, which also makes it far easier to transfer files to
other devices than using a fiddly SD card since most computers don't
have SD readers built-in either.
I use wifi. USB card readers are common and not all that expensive. I
used one for the card in my Canon camera back in the dark ages.
On 2023-11-28 00:06:52 +0000, Larry Wolff said:
On 11/27/2023 1:41 PM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Anyway, it's nice to have the option of - *large* - memory expansion,
instead of getting stuck with a too small (storage) phone.
As you said, it's nice is you can fill up any inexpensive 512GB card with
photos & video & then pop in another card & fill up another 512GB.
And another. And another. And another after that.
But it's also portable.
What no phone can do without the sd card is pop it out of one phone
and put
it in another phone and have all the data be available to the other
phone.
Very useful. The dinky half-baked iPhone can't do anything like that.
Because like the haedphone jack, it's a very niche market. Most normal
people don't bother, and have never bothered, fiddling about with silly
SD cards.
On 2023-11-28 00:06:52 +0000, Larry Wolff said:
On 11/27/2023 1:41 PM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Anyway, it's nice to have the option of - *large* - memory expansion,
instead of getting stuck with a too small (storage) phone.
As you said, it's nice is you can fill up any inexpensive 512GB card with photos & video & then pop in another card & fill up another 512GB.
And another. And another. And another after that.
But it's also portable.
What no phone can do without the sd card is pop it out of one phone and put it in another phone and have all the data be available to the other phone.
Very useful. The dinky half-baked iPhone can't do anything like that.
Because like the haedphone jack, it's a very niche market. Most normal
people don't bother, and have never bothered, fiddling about with silly
SD cards.
On 2023-11-28 03:32:23 +0000, The Real Bev said:
On 11/27/23 7:08 PM, Your Name wrote:
On 2023-11-28 00:00:27 +0000, Larry Wolff said:
On this Mon, 27 Nov 2023 08:18:45 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:It's pretty easy to plug many external drives of various types into an
Take data expansion. This means there is unused volume inside from the >>>>> start. Better to reclaim that (more battery) and sell it with more SSD >>>>> from the start. Less parts, more reliable. Seal the phone - better >>>>> water resistance.
Your reasoning is absurd because you don't even know what an sd card does. >>>> And you are making up excuses about "water resistance" because it's absurd.
How are you going to get portable memory with your dinky broken iPhone? >>>
iPhone these days, which also makes it far easier to transfer files to
other devices than using a fiddly SD card since most computers don't
have SD readers built-in either.
I use wifi. USB card readers are common and not all that expensive. I
used one for the card in my Canon camera back in the dark ages.
You can of course buy an extra adapter, but that kind of misses the point.
They're not really "common". Out of all the various people and small businesses I help out, over the last 30+ years, *none* of them have
ever used an SD card or card reader, not even on their cameras (other
than the original it may have come with). :-)
Our own old Canon digital camera still has the original SD card it came
with in it and has never been removed either. It was far easier to plug
the camera into the computer with the cable.
Very useful. The dinky half-baked iPhone can't do anything like that.
Because like the haedphone jack, it's a very niche market. Most normal
people don't bother, and have never bothered, fiddling about with silly
SD cards.
LOL, blanket statement again :-D
I have seen people doing it. Buy a new phone, initialize it, plug the
old memory card, hey presto, all the photos are transferred instantly.
Phone falls into water and is destroyed. Extract the memory card, dry it
out well, get all the photos safe.
Take the memory card out, plug into the laptop, instant access to all
the photos, backup them or whatever. Or plug the card into the TV set.
You can of course buy an extra adapter, but that kind of misses the point. >>
They're not really "common". Out of all the various people and small
businesses I help out, over the last 30+ years, *none* of them have
ever used an SD card or card reader, not even on their cameras (other
than the original it may have come with). :-)
I bought my first digital camera in 1999. People had them years
previously. How did they transfer files if not by a separate card
reader? Computers did not commonly have card slots and cameras did not
have wifi/USB capability. At least mine didn't.
Because like the haedphone jack, it's a very niche market. Most normal
people don't bother, and have never bothered, fiddling about with silly
SD cards.
What you both have 'overlooked' is that I was *not* talking about "fiddling" with (Micro) SD-cards, but about using *one* as a - large - *memory expansion*, i.e. insert *once*, no "fiddling" required.
But, as Carlos mentioned, there are other situations where 'fiddling'
- i.e. *data exchange between devices* - can be very worthwhile.
That these scenarios are much harder or impossible without a SD-card
slot, makes the footstamping of the Apple crowd even sillier. Just
accept that there are differences - *both* 'ways' - and move on. No need
to get your knickers in a twist.
BTW, why do cameras have a memory-card slot? Can't they just be
equipped with enough memory, like any other sane device?
Because like the haedphone jack, it's a very niche market. Most normal
people don't bother, and have never bothered, fiddling about with silly
SD cards.
LOL, blanket statement again :-D
I have seen people doing it. Buy a new phone, initialize it, plug the
old memory card, hey presto, all the photos are transferred instantly.
Phone falls into water and is destroyed. Extract the memory card, dry it
out well, get all the photos safe.
Take the memory card out, plug into the laptop, instant access to all
the photos, backup them or whatever. Or plug the card into the TV set.
Carlos E. R. wrote on Tue, 28 Nov 2023 12:49:55 +0100 :
Because like the haedphone jack, it's a very niche market. Most normal
people don't bother, and have never bothered, fiddling about with silly
SD cards.
LOL, blanket statement again :-D
I have seen people doing it. Buy a new phone, initialize it, plug the
old memory card, hey presto, all the photos are transferred instantly.
Phone falls into water and is destroyed. Extract the memory card, dry it
out well, get all the photos safe.
Take the memory card out, plug into the laptop, instant access to all
the photos, backup them or whatever. Or plug the card into the TV set.
What's this "fiddling about with silly SD cards" that nobody is doing?
In my experience, most people who have the sd card bay add the sd card when they buy the phone and that's the last time they ever "fiddle" with it.
That very first day they set their camera output to save to that sd card. That's all the "fiddling" most people do with their Android phone sd cards.
When that card fills up, they usually offload the data onto a computer, (which doesn't necessitate ever "fiddling" with the SD card at all).
It seems the posters complaining about "fiddling" have never used sd cards.
Your Name <YourName@yourisp.com> wrote:
On 2023-11-28 00:06:52 +0000, Larry Wolff said:
On 11/27/2023 1:41 PM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Anyway, it's nice to have the option of - *large* - memory expansion,
instead of getting stuck with a too small (storage) phone.
As you said, it's nice is you can fill up any inexpensive 512GB card with >>> photos & video & then pop in another card & fill up another 512GB.
And another. And another. And another after that.
But it's also portable.
What no phone can do without the sd card is pop it out of one phone and put >>> it in another phone and have all the data be available to the other phone. >>>
Very useful. The dinky half-baked iPhone can't do anything like that.
Because like the haedphone jack, it's a very niche market. Most normal
people don't bother, and have never bothered, fiddling about with silly
SD cards.
What you both have 'overlooked' is that I was *not* talking about "fiddling" with (Micro) SD-cards, but about using *one* as a - large - *memory expansion*, i.e. insert *once*, no "fiddling" required.
But, as Carlos mentioned, there are other situations where 'fiddling'
- i.e. *data exchange between devices* - can be very worthwhile.
That these scenarios are much harder or impossible without a SD-card
slot, makes the footstamping of the Apple crowd even sillier. Just
accept that there are differences - *both* 'ways' - and move on. No need
to get your knickers in a twist.
BTW, why do cameras have a memory-card slot? Can't they just be
equipped with enough memory, like any other sane device?
On 11/27/23 9:54 PM, Your Name wrote:
On 2023-11-28 03:32:23 +0000, The Real Bev said:
On 11/27/23 7:08 PM, Your Name wrote:
On 2023-11-28 00:00:27 +0000, Larry Wolff said:
On this Mon, 27 Nov 2023 08:18:45 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:
Take data expansion. This means there is unused volume inside
from the
start. Better to reclaim that (more battery) and sell it with
more SSD
from the start. Less parts, more reliable. Seal the phone - better >>>>>> water resistance.
Your reasoning is absurd because you don't even know what an sd
card does.
And you are making up excuses about "water resistance" because it's
absurd.
How are you going to get portable memory with your dinky broken
iPhone?
It's pretty easy to plug many external drives of various types into an >>>> iPhone these days, which also makes it far easier to transfer files to >>>> other devices than using a fiddly SD card since most computers don't
have SD readers built-in either.
I use wifi. USB card readers are common and not all that expensive.
I used one for the card in my Canon camera back in the dark ages.
You can of course buy an extra adapter, but that kind of misses the
point.
They're not really "common". Out of all the various people and small
businesses I help out, over the last 30+ years, *none* of them have
ever used an SD card or card reader, not even on their cameras (other
than the original it may have come with). :-)
I bought my first digital camera in 1999. People had them years previously. How did they transfer files if not by a separate card
reader? Computers did not commonly have card slots and cameras did not
have wifi/USB capability. At least mine didn't.
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
Show me where I made such a claim.
You're making claims a car without the trunk is as good as one with it.
On 2023-11-28 16:22, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Your Name <YourName@yourisp.com> wrote:
On 2023-11-28 00:06:52 +0000, Larry Wolff said:
On 11/27/2023 1:41 PM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Anyway, it's nice to have the option of - *large* - memory expansion, >>>> instead of getting stuck with a too small (storage) phone.
As you said, it's nice is you can fill up any inexpensive 512GB card with >>> photos & video & then pop in another card & fill up another 512GB.
And another. And another. And another after that.
But it's also portable.
What no phone can do without the sd card is pop it out of one phone and put
it in another phone and have all the data be available to the other phone.
Very useful. The dinky half-baked iPhone can't do anything like that.
Because like the haedphone jack, it's a very niche market. Most normal
people don't bother, and have never bothered, fiddling about with silly
SD cards.
What you both have 'overlooked' is that I was *not* talking about "fiddling" with (Micro) SD-cards, but about using *one* as a - large - *memory expansion*, i.e. insert *once*, no "fiddling" required.
But, as Carlos mentioned, there are other situations where 'fiddling'
- i.e. *data exchange between devices* - can be very worthwhile.
That these scenarios are much harder or impossible without a SD-card slot, makes the footstamping of the Apple crowd even sillier. Just
accept that there are differences - *both* 'ways' - and move on. No need
to get your knickers in a twist.
BTW, why do cameras have a memory-card slot? Can't they just be
equipped with enough memory, like any other sane device?
:-)
Cheaper not to ? for the manufacturer :-P
The buyer can buy different sizes of cards, and different speeds. Is he
going to do video? Is he going to do burst photography? He needs a
faster card, which is more expensive.
Is he going on a long trip? He may need several cards.
Is he shooting an event? He may need several cards during the event (and several batteries).
Is he shooting an event? He might swap cards periodically so that an assistant moves the photos to a computer to have them accessible in near
real time.
Oh, and the card can survive being immersed in water; the camera not.
Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-11-28 16:22, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Your Name <YourName@yourisp.com> wrote:
On 2023-11-28 00:06:52 +0000, Larry Wolff said:
On 11/27/2023 1:41 PM, Frank Slootweg wrote:Because like the haedphone jack, it's a very niche market. Most normal >>>> people don't bother, and have never bothered, fiddling about with silly >>>> SD cards.
Anyway, it's nice to have the option of - *large* - memory expansion, >>>>>> instead of getting stuck with a too small (storage) phone.
As you said, it's nice is you can fill up any inexpensive 512GB card with >>>>> photos & video & then pop in another card & fill up another 512GB.
And another. And another. And another after that.
But it's also portable.
What no phone can do without the sd card is pop it out of one phone and put
it in another phone and have all the data be available to the other phone.
Very useful. The dinky half-baked iPhone can't do anything like that. >>>>
What you both have 'overlooked' is that I was *not* talking about
"fiddling" with (Micro) SD-cards, but about using *one* as a - large -
*memory expansion*, i.e. insert *once*, no "fiddling" required.
But, as Carlos mentioned, there are other situations where 'fiddling' >>> - i.e. *data exchange between devices* - can be very worthwhile.
That these scenarios are much harder or impossible without a SD-card >>> slot, makes the footstamping of the Apple crowd even sillier. Just
accept that there are differences - *both* 'ways' - and move on. No need >>> to get your knickers in a twist.
BTW, why do cameras have a memory-card slot? Can't they just be
equipped with enough memory, like any other sane device?
:-)
Cheaper not to ? for the manufacturer :-P
Haven't you been paying to the Newsgroups header!? Money is no object
and the more of it goes to the manufacturer, the better, big profit is
good and all that jazz.
The buyer can buy different sizes of cards, and different speeds. Is he
going to do video? Is he going to do burst photography? He needs a
faster card, which is more expensive.
Nonsense! Just make the internal storage big and fast enough,
'problem' solved. And what's with the "more expensive" bit? It's only
money, get over it!
Is he going on a long trip? He may need several cards.
Nope. See above.
Is he shooting an event? He may need several cards during the event (and
several batteries).
Nope. See above. And he should have a big enough battery to start
with! Sheesh!
Is he shooting an event? He might swap cards periodically so that an
assistant moves the photos to a computer to have them accessible in near
real time.
Doesn't the crap device have Wi-Fi (or a cable) to shoot and transfer
at the same time?
Oh, and the card can survive being immersed in water; the camera not.
It's a camera, not a life-vest. Learn to know the difference!
Anyway, the data is already in the cloud, 'problem' solved.
"Yes dear, I'll take another one of the nice pink pills now."
On 11/27/2023 9:12 PM, Alan Browne wrote:
Your reasoning is absurd because you don't even know what an sd card does. >>Given I have nearly a dozen within reach right here right now, that is
quite the claim.
All your arguments reek of you not understanding what you make absurd
excuses for not having on that dinky cheap dollar-store iPhone of yours.
You don't even know that sd works as portable storage, so it's absurd your claim that the only reason for an sd card is to augment internal storage.
Although it does also augment the internal storage.
Your dinky dollar-store cheap plastic iPhone can't do any of that.
And you are making up excuses about "water resistance" because it's absurd. >>And of course any device that has a "port" or is conveniently opened is
at higher risk of water damage. iPhones on the other hand have great
water resistance and have been demonstrated to exceed their spec for
time and depth by multiples.
Phones with ports have fine water resistance.
You're just making absurd excuses because you don't have the aux port
in that cheap dinky plastic dollar-store iPhone of yours.
How are you going to get portable memory with your dinky broken iPhone?
It is my portable memory. I often encrypted volumes of data at work to
bring home for storage using my iPhone as the data carrier. Quite fast
and convenient esp. using the AirDrop feature on both ends of the
transaction.
See. You don't even understand the slightest of what portable memory means.
Nor do you understand that you can capture 512GB of media and then do it again, and again, and again (all day, every day) using those sd cards.
you can't do anything like that in your cheap plastic dinky iPhone.
Every excuse you made is absurd because you don't understand any of this.
Your Name <YourName@yourisp.com> wrote:
On 2023-11-28 00:06:52 +0000, Larry Wolff said:
On 11/27/2023 1:41 PM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Anyway, it's nice to have the option of - *large* - memory expansion,
instead of getting stuck with a too small (storage) phone.
As you said, it's nice is you can fill up any inexpensive 512GB card with >>> photos & video & then pop in another card & fill up another 512GB.
And another. And another. And another after that.
But it's also portable.
What no phone can do without the sd card is pop it out of one phone and put >>> it in another phone and have all the data be available to the other phone. >>>
Very useful. The dinky half-baked iPhone can't do anything like that.
Because like the haedphone jack, it's a very niche market. Most normal
people don't bother, and have never bothered, fiddling about with silly
SD cards.
What you both have 'overlooked' is that I was *not* talking about "fiddling" with (Micro) SD-cards, but about using *one* as a - large - *memory expansion*, i.e. insert *once*, no "fiddling" required.
But, as Carlos mentioned, there are other situations where 'fiddling'
- i.e. *data exchange between devices* - can be very worthwhile.
That these scenarios are much harder or impossible without a SD-card
slot, makes the footstamping of the Apple crowd even sillier. Just
accept that there are differences - *both* 'ways' - and move on. No need
to get your knickers in a twist.
BTW, why do cameras have a memory-card slot? Can't they just be
equipped with enough memory, like any other sane device?
Anyway, the data is already in the cloud, 'problem' solved.
It is not.
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote
Anyway, the data is already in the cloud, 'problem' solved.
It is not.
Hi Carlos,
I'm not sure you responded to Franks rather humorous jokes as if you knew they were jokes. They were all pretty funny. Sarcastically so.
The Apple iKooks pay through the nose for everything, and then in the very end they croon that they get a tiny but of some of that money back in what they call 'resale value' (which doesn't take into account full costs.
The iKooks are _desperate_ for that so-called 'resale value' after all.
On 2023-11-28 04:10, Your Name wrote:
On 2023-11-28 00:06:52 +0000, Larry Wolff said:
On 11/27/2023 1:41 PM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Anyway, it's nice to have the option of - *large* - memory expansion,
instead of getting stuck with a too small (storage) phone.
As you said, it's nice is you can fill up any inexpensive 512GB card with >>> photos & video & then pop in another card & fill up another 512GB.
And another. And another. And another after that.
But it's also portable.
What no phone can do without the sd card is pop it out of one phone and put >>> it in another phone and have all the data be available to the other phone. >>>
Very useful. The dinky half-baked iPhone can't do anything like that.
Because like the haedphone jack, it's a very niche market. Most normal
people don't bother, and have never bothered, fiddling about with silly
SD cards.
LOL, blanket statement again :-D
I have seen people doing it.
Buy a new phone, initialize it, plug the old memory card, hey presto,
all the photos are transferred instantly.
Phone falls into water and is destroyed. Extract the memory card, dry
it out well, get all the photos safe.
Take the memory card out, plug into the laptop, instant access to all
the photos, backup them or whatever. Or plug the card into the TV set.
Carlos E. R. wrote on Tue, 28 Nov 2023 12:49:55 +0100 :
Because like the haedphone jack, it's a very niche market. Most normal
people don't bother, and have never bothered, fiddling about with silly
SD cards.
LOL, blanket statement again :-D
I have seen people doing it. Buy a new phone, initialize it, plug the
old memory card, hey presto, all the photos are transferred instantly.
Phone falls into water and is destroyed. Extract the memory card, dry it
out well, get all the photos safe.
Take the memory card out, plug into the laptop, instant access to all
the photos, backup them or whatever. Or plug the card into the TV set.
What's this "fiddling about with silly SD cards" that nobody is doing?
In my experience, most people who have the sd card bay add the sd card when they buy the phone and that's the last time they ever "fiddle" with it.
That very first day they set their camera output to save to that sd card. That's all the "fiddling" most people do with their Android phone sd cards.
When that card fills up, they usually offload the data onto a computer, (which doesn't necessitate ever "fiddling" with the SD card at all).
It seems the posters complaining about "fiddling" have never used sd cards.
On 2023-11-28 19:31, Frank Slootweg wrote:<snip>
Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-11-28 16:22, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Your Name <YourName@yourisp.com> wrote:
On 2023-11-28 00:06:52 +0000, Larry Wolff said:
On 11/27/2023 1:41 PM, Frank Slootweg wrote:Because like the haedphone jack, it's a very niche market. Most normal >>>>> people don't bother, and have never bothered, fiddling about with silly >>>>> SD cards.
Anyway, it's nice to have the option of - *large* - memory expansion, >>>>>>> instead of getting stuck with a too small (storage) phone.
As you said, it's nice is you can fill up any inexpensive 512GB card >>>>>> with photos & video & then pop in another card & fill up another 512GB. >>>>>>
And another. And another. And another after that.
But it's also portable.
What no phone can do without the sd card is pop it out of one phone and >>>>>> put it in another phone and have all the data be available to the other >>>>>> phone.
Very useful. The dinky half-baked iPhone can't do anything like that. >>>>>
What you both have 'overlooked' is that I was *not* talking about
"fiddling" with (Micro) SD-cards, but about using *one* as a - large - >>>> *memory expansion*, i.e. insert *once*, no "fiddling" required.
But, as Carlos mentioned, there are other situations where 'fiddling'
- i.e. *data exchange between devices* - can be very worthwhile.
That these scenarios are much harder or impossible without a SD-card
slot, makes the footstamping of the Apple crowd even sillier. Just
accept that there are differences - *both* 'ways' - and move on. No need >>>> to get your knickers in a twist.
BTW, why do cameras have a memory-card slot? Can't they just be
equipped with enough memory, like any other sane device?
:-)
Cheaper not to ? for the manufacturer :-P
Haven't you been paying to the Newsgroups header!? Money is no object
and the more of it goes to the manufacturer, the better, big profit is
good and all that jazz.
No, the cameras are designed to be as cheap as feasible, there is a lot
of competition. As long as you don't go for Apple cameras, which I
don't know if they exist :-p
What's this "fiddling about with silly SD cards" that nobody is doing?
Blank statement again, that I know first hand is false; thus the rest of
your post doesn't have validity.
Nobody is doing? Really?
You've just confirmed *exactly* what I said: Most people put in the
initial card and never take it out again.
The fact that only very few people ever bother removing and inserting
SD cards is precisely why having the slot is not necessary, and why
Apple doesn't bother having them on the iPhone, iPad, nor most of their computers. It's far far easier for most users to just transfer the
photos from the phone via a cable or wi-fi connection. The "SD card"
may as well be standard memory soldered onto the motherboartd in the
factory.
I'm not sure you responded to Franks rather humorous jokes as if you knew
they were jokes. They were all pretty funny. Sarcastically so.
We were not talking of Apples, but cameras, full bodied cameras. You can
not put into the cloud the big sized photos a camera generates during a session, in real time.
So memory cards are needed on cameras, and more than one. You can not
use internal memory for this purpose.
I don't see any joke here.
Take the memory card out, plug into the laptop, instant access to all
the photos, backup them or whatever. Or plug the card into the TV set.
I never said it wasn't useful to the niche market that does use them.
On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 11:05:18 +1300, Your Name wrote:
Your Name wrote on 28.11.2023 16:05>> It seems the posters complaining
about "fiddling" have never used sd cards.
You've just confirmed *exactly* what I said: Most people put in the
initial card and never take it out again.
The fact that only very few people ever bother removing and inserting
SD cards is precisely why having the slot is not necessary, and why
Apple doesn't bother having them on the iPhone, iPad, nor most of
their computers. It's far far easier for most users to just transfer
the photos from the phone via a cable or wi-fi connection. The "SD
card" may as well be standard memory soldered onto the motherboartd in
the factory.
Most people don't change a tire on a car either but your Apple car has the tires permanently welded onto the axle so that they can never be changed.
On 2023-11-28 21:34, Wally J wrote:
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote
Anyway, the data is already in the cloud, 'problem' solved.
It is not.
Hi Carlos,
I'm not sure you responded to Franks rather humorous jokes as if you knew they were jokes. They were all pretty funny. Sarcastically so.
We were not talking of Apples, but cameras, full bodied cameras. You can
not put into the cloud the big sized photos a camera generates during a session, in real time.
So memory cards are needed on cameras, and more than one. You can not
use internal memory for this purpose.
I don't see any joke here.
Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-11-28 21:34, Wally J wrote:
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote
Anyway, the data is already in the cloud, 'problem' solved.
It is not.
Hi Carlos,
I'm not sure you responded to Franks rather humorous jokes as if you knew >>> they were jokes. They were all pretty funny. Sarcastically so.
We were not talking of Apples, but cameras, full bodied cameras. You can
not put into the cloud the big sized photos a camera generates during a
session, in real time.
So memory cards are needed on cameras, and more than one. You can not
use internal memory for this purpose.
I don't see any joke here.
My response [2] - and the earlier one [1] - was clearly a joke, irony, sarcasm, <whatever>.
I took the silly 'no-one needs SD-cards in phones/tablet' stance and extrapolated that to another device which uses memory-cards, and
'questioned' why *they* have memory-card slots:
BTW, why do cameras have a memory-card slot? Can't they just be
equipped with enough memory, like any other sane device?
</FS>
You responded to that sentence with a smiley, so I thought you got the joke and hence I expanded on the joke/irony/sarcasm in my second
response. But now it trurns out did not get the jokes.
Anyway, look at the last sentence of my second response:
"Yes dear, I'll take another one of the nice pink pills now."
</FS>
Does that look like I was at all serious!?
[...]
[1] Message-ID: <uk543v.4us.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>
[2] Message-ID: <uk5f5c.1o4.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>
On 2023-11-28 10:22, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Your Name <YourName@yourisp.com> wrote:
On 2023-11-28 00:06:52 +0000, Larry Wolff said:
On 11/27/2023 1:41 PM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Anyway, it's nice to have the option of - *large* - memory expansion, >>>> instead of getting stuck with a too small (storage) phone.
As you said, it's nice is you can fill up any inexpensive 512GB card with >>> photos & video & then pop in another card & fill up another 512GB.
And another. And another. And another after that.
But it's also portable.
What no phone can do without the sd card is pop it out of one phone and put
it in another phone and have all the data be available to the other phone.
Very useful. The dinky half-baked iPhone can't do anything like that.
Because like the haedphone jack, it's a very niche market. Most normal
people don't bother, and have never bothered, fiddling about with silly
SD cards.
What you both have 'overlooked' is that I was *not* talking about "fiddling" with (Micro) SD-cards, but about using *one* as a - large - *memory expansion*, i.e. insert *once*, no "fiddling" required.
But, as Carlos mentioned, there are other situations where 'fiddling'
- i.e. *data exchange between devices* - can be very worthwhile.
That these scenarios are much harder or impossible without a SD-card slot, makes the footstamping of the Apple crowd even sillier. Just
accept that there are differences - *both* 'ways' - and move on. No need
to get your knickers in a twist.
We're not in a twist at all.
It's fanatic Arlen (who I really should
just ignore) who goes bananas over iPhone "kooks").
He needs professional help and we need to ignore trolls.
BTW, why do cameras have a memory-card slot? Can't they just be
equipped with enough memory, like any other sane device?
When I'm shooting I usually carry 2 - 3 cards plus the 2 cards in the
camera. Full frame fills cards fast when shooting raw. I can often
"make do" with the 2 cards but sometimes I overflow into one or 2 more.
On travel (personal), I also bring a card reader and backup those cards
to the laptop.
The drone cards fill fast - but then the batteries last 25 - 30 minutes (practically - flights are about 20 minutes), so a single SD per drone
per outing is enough (usually). 3 batts per drone - change between
flights of course.
But of course none of these things are smartphones.
And they don't have FM receivers.
And the aux jacks they have have nothing to do with audio.
On this Wed, 29 Nov 2023 10:59:47 +1300, Your Name wrote:
Take the memory card out, plug into the laptop, instant access to all
the photos, backup them or whatever. Or plug the card into the TV set.
I never said it wasn't useful to the niche market that does use them.
We have to agree with Your Name that using the phone as a camera is, to
him, a niche market. He says taking pictures is what cameras are for.
Not phones.
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
On 2023-11-28 10:22, Frank Slootweg wrote:
BTW, why do cameras have a memory-card slot? Can't they just be
equipped with enough memory, like any other sane device?
When I'm shooting I usually carry 2 - 3 cards plus the 2 cards in the
camera. Full frame fills cards fast when shooting raw. I can often
"make do" with the 2 cards but sometimes I overflow into one or 2 more.
On travel (personal), I also bring a card reader and backup those cards
to the laptop.
The drone cards fill fast - but then the batteries last 25 - 30 minutes
(practically - flights are about 20 minutes), so a single SD per drone
per outing is enough (usually). 3 batts per drone - change between
flights of course.
But of course none of these things are smartphones.
It looks like you missed the joke/irony/sarcasm in my "BTW, ..."
comment. I.e. why should a camera have a slot for a memory-card, while -
for some of You Guys (TM) - it's off limits for a phone/tablet?
And they don't have FM receivers.
Bummer! That would be *so* handy when you're out of mobile range!
And the aux jacks they have have nothing to do with audio.
Well, I think some of my camera's have 'aux jacks' which do have to do with audio, but they're not 3.5mm "1890"'s TRRS! :-)
BTW, I think in 1890 [1] there was no TRRS, nor TRS and no 3.5mm
version, so you might want to update that date! :-)
[1] If that was the year you keep on mentioning.
BTW, I think in 1890 [1] there was no TRRS, nor TRS and no 3.5mm
version, so you might want to update that date! :-)
[1] If that was the year you keep on mentioning.
I got it wrong indeed. Should be 1877.
The original TR "patch cable" in this style emerged sometime in the
1870's. The 3.5 TRS/TRRS designs we see today descend therefrom. (as
far back as 1977, actually - so I'll update my comments going forward).
Does that look like I was at all serious!?
I have no idea what those pills may be.
Humour across international boundaries is very difficult.
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
BTW, I think in 1890 [1] there was no TRRS, nor TRS and no 3.5mm
version, so you might want to update that date! :-)
[1] If that was the year you keep on mentioning.
I got it wrong indeed. Should be 1877.
The original TR "patch cable" in this style emerged sometime in the
1870's. The 3.5 TRS/TRRS designs we see today descend therefrom. (as
far back as 1977, actually - so I'll update my comments going forward).
To respond to the claim that anything that works must be replaced by Apple with something that costs more just to get back to what already worked,
they invented the simple usable round wheel many thousands of years ago.
Following the argument by Alan, since it works, Apple must get rid of it.
I bought my first digital camera in 1999. People had them years
previously. How did they transfer files if not by a separate card
reader? Computers did not commonly have card slots and cameras did not
have wifi/USB capability. At least mine didn't.
As below, you plug the camera into the computer using a data cable.
You're making claims a car without the trunk is as good as one with it.
No one has made that claim.
On 11/28/2023 6:15 PM, Your Name wrote:
I bought my first digital camera in 1999. People had them years
previously. How did they transfer files if not by a separate card
reader? Computers did not commonly have card slots and cameras did not
have wifi/USB capability. At least mine didn't.
As below, you plug the camera into the computer using a data cable.
What if you're going to a wedding, and you plan ahead and bring sd cards.
Person 1 has an SLR and fills up the storage with photos. He "fiddles" with an sd card, & takes more. Then he "fiddles" with another sd card for more.
Person 2 has a normal Android phone, so he does the exact same things.
But what does person 3 do who, sadly, only has access to his iPhone camera?
But he is right.
He manifestly is not. Apple do not make cars.
Yet!
A Chinese electronics company has just released a car, and there are
lots of rumours and facts that say an Apple Car could be due "soon" ...
some say 2026. It was due around 2020, but has had problems, not the
least of which is probably the pointlessly idiotic self-driving system
which has hopefully been abandoned.
Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
But he is right.
He manifestly is not. Apple do not make cars.
Yet!
A Chinese electronics company has just released a car, and there are
lots of rumours and facts that say an Apple Car could be due "soon" ...
some say 2026. It was due around 2020, but has had problems, not the
least of which is probably the pointlessly idiotic self-driving system
which has hopefully been abandoned.
What Apple did was design a car without a trunk so that you would buy something else (a drag-along trailer perhaps) to compensate for that loss.
On 11/28/2023 6:15 PM, Your Name wrote:
I bought my first digital camera in 1999. People had them years
previously. How did they transfer files if not by a separate card
reader? Computers did not commonly have card slots and cameras did not
have wifi/USB capability. At least mine didn't.
As below, you plug the camera into the computer using a data cable.
What if you're going to a wedding, and you plan ahead and bring sd cards.
Person 1 has an SLR and fills up the storage with photos. He "fiddles" with an sd card, & takes more. Then he "fiddles" with another sd card for more.
Person 2 has a normal Android phone, so he does the exact same things.
But what does person 3 do who, sadly, only has access to his iPhone camera?
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:The 3.5mm TRS jacks go back a lot further than that. They are the same
BTW, I think in 1890 [1] there was no TRRS, nor TRS and no 3.5mm
version, so you might want to update that date! :-)
[1] If that was the year you keep on mentioning.
I got it wrong indeed. Should be 1877.
The original TR "patch cable" in this style emerged sometime in the
1870's. The 3.5 TRS/TRRS designs we see today descend therefrom. (as
far back as 1977, actually - so I'll update my comments going forward).
To respond to the claim that anything that works must be replaced by Apple with something that costs more just to get back to what already worked,
they invented the simple usable round wheel many thousands of years ago.
Following the argument by Alan, since it works, Apple must get rid of it.
On 2023-12-01 19:42:42 +0000, Larry Wolff said:
On 11/28/2023 6:15 PM, Your Name wrote:
I bought my first digital camera in 1999. People had them years
previously. How did they transfer files if not by a separate card
reader? Computers did not commonly have card slots and cameras did not >>>> have wifi/USB capability. At least mine didn't.
As below, you plug the camera into the computer using a data cable.
What if you're going to a wedding, and you plan ahead and bring sd cards.
Person 1 has an SLR and fills up the storage with photos. He "fiddles"
with
an sd card, & takes more. Then he "fiddles" with another sd card for
more.
Person 2 has a normal Android phone, so he does the exact same things.
But what does person 3 do who, sadly, only has access to his iPhone
camera?
Any normal person who takes so many photos that they quickly fill up a
mobile phone probably needs to seek professional psychiatric help. :-p
What Apple did was design a car without a trunk so that you would buy
something else (a drag-along trailer perhaps) to compensate for that loss.
No. That is all simply false.
What Apple did was design a piece of consumer electronics and let people decided whether or not they wanted to buy it.
On 2023-12-01 22:40, Your Name wrote:
On 2023-12-01 19:42:42 +0000, Larry Wolff said:
On 11/28/2023 6:15 PM, Your Name wrote:Any normal person who takes so many photos that they quickly fill up a
I bought my first digital camera in 1999. People had them years
previously. How did they transfer files if not by a separate card
reader? Computers did not commonly have card slots and cameras did not >>>>> have wifi/USB capability. At least mine didn't.
As below, you plug the camera into the computer using a data cable.
What if you're going to a wedding, and you plan ahead and bring sd cards. >>>
Person 1 has an SLR and fills up the storage with photos. He "fiddles" with >>> an sd card, & takes more. Then he "fiddles" with another sd card for more. >>>
Person 2 has a normal Android phone, so he does the exact same things.
But what does person 3 do who, sadly, only has access to his iPhone camera? >>
mobile phone probably needs to seek professional psychiatric help. :-p
Not really.
I can take five thousand photos in high resolution on a single night,
out in the bunnies.
Try to upload that to the cloud while "out in the bunnies".
B. Most phones these days can transfer files wirelessly, either locally
or to the internet.
Try to upload that to the cloud while "out in the bunnies".
As before: very niche market.
The 3.5mm TRS jacks go back a lot further than that. They are the sameThe original TR "patch cable" in this style emerged sometime in the
1870's. The 3.5 TRS/TRRS designs we see today descend therefrom. (as
far back as 1977, actually - so I'll update my comments going forward).
To respond to the claim that anything that works must be replaced by Apple >> with something that costs more just to get back to what already worked,
they invented the simple usable round wheel many thousands of years ago.
Following the argument by Alan, since it works, Apple must get rid of it.
as the 1/8" stereo jacks. TRRS is newer.
But what does person 3 do who, sadly, only has access to his iPhone camera?
The iPhone loads the photos up onto iCloud.
On 12/1/2023 10:01 PM, Your Name wrote:<snip the usual load of trolling bollocks>
Try to upload that to the cloud while "out in the bunnies".
As before: very niche market.
I'm wondering if the reason you whine so much about the iPhone is because
no iPhone can do what other phones can do so you're embarrassed about that.
You complain that "nobody wants" to save photos.
You whine that "nobody needs" to save photos.
For some reason, they keep telling us that the only reason it was removed
by Apple is that it had been working just fine for a very long time.
Apple, Samsung, etc. are removing the headphone jack simply because
very few people use it. Most people can't be bothered with tangled
cables, so wireless earbuds have become far more popular. In fact the majority of people probably don't use earbuds at all - their phone is
used mainly as little more than a high-tech messaging device.
sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
The 3.5mm TRS jacks go back a lot further than that. They are the sameTo respond to the claim that anything that works must be replaced by Apple >>> with something that costs more just to get back to what already worked,
The original TR "patch cable" in this style emerged sometime in the
1870's. The 3.5 TRS/TRRS designs we see today descend therefrom. (as
far back as 1977, actually - so I'll update my comments going forward). >>>
they invented the simple usable round wheel many thousands of years ago. >>>
Following the argument by Alan, since it works, Apple must get rid of it. >>
as the 1/8" stereo jacks. TRRS is newer.
The date something was invented isn't important.
What's important is that it works.
For some reason, they keep telling us that the only reason it was removed
by Apple is that it had been working just fine for a very long time.
sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
as the 1/8" stereo jacks. TRRS is newer.The original TR "patch cable" in this style emerged sometime in theTo respond to the claim that anything that works must be replaced by Apple >>> with something that costs more just to get back to what already worked,
1870's. The 3.5 TRS/TRRS designs we see today descend therefrom. (as
far back as 1977, actually - so I'll update my comments going forward). >>>
they invented the simple usable round wheel many thousands of years ago. >>>
Following the argument by Alan, since it works, Apple must get rid of it. >> The 3.5mm TRS jacks go back a lot further than that. They are the same
The date something was invented isn't important.
What's important is that it works.
For some reason, they keep telling us that the only reason it was removed
by Apple is that it had been working just fine for a very long time.
Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
For some reason, they keep telling us that the only reason it was removed >>> by Apple is that it had been working just fine for a very long time.
Apple, Samsung, etc. are removing the headphone jack simply because
very few people use it. Most people can't be bothered with tangled
cables, so wireless earbuds have become far more popular. In fact the
majority of people probably don't use earbuds at all - their phone is
used mainly as little more than a high-tech messaging device.
Your excuse for your iPhone not being a capable phone is ridiculous because anyone on any phone can add bluetooth earbuds - whether Apple or Samsung.
Apple, Samsung, etc. are removing the headphone jack simply because very
few people use it. Most people can't be bothered with tangled cables, so wireless earbuds have become far more popular. In fact the majority of
people probably don't use earbuds at all - their phone is used mainly as little more than a high-tech messaging device.
I'm wondering if the reason you whine so much about the iPhone is because<snip the usual load of trolling bollocks>
no iPhone can do what other phones can do so you're embarrassed about that. >>
You complain that "nobody wants" to save photos.
You whine that "nobody needs" to save photos.
I never said any such thing
Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
For some reason, they keep telling us that the only reason it was removed >>> by Apple is that it had been working just fine for a very long time.
Apple, Samsung, etc. are removing the headphone jack simply because
very few people use it. Most people can't be bothered with tangled
cables, so wireless earbuds have become far more popular. In fact the
majority of people probably don't use earbuds at all - their phone is
used mainly as little more than a high-tech messaging device.
Your excuse for your iPhone not being a capable phone is ridiculous because anyone on any phone can add bluetooth earbuds - whether Apple or Samsung.
Your excuse for your iPhone not being a capable phone is ridiculous because >> anyone on any phone can add bluetooth earbuds - whether Apple or Samsung.
Why did Samsung remove the jack on many of its higher end phones?
Beyond wheels I don't know of anything all that enduring that hasn't
been replaced by something better. Although wheels themselves
continuously evolve - haven't seen wood, tallow lubricated wheel hubs in
a while ...
For some reason, they keep telling us that the only reason it was removed
by Apple is that it had been working just fine for a very long time.
That is a silly statement.
And of course as soon as Apple broke the mold, Samsung followed. Par.
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
Your excuse for your iPhone not being a capable phone is ridiculous because >>> anyone on any phone can add bluetooth earbuds - whether Apple or Samsung. >>Why did Samsung remove the jack on many of its higher end phones?
Good question.
Probably for the same reason that Apple removed the jack.
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
Beyond wheels I don't know of anything all that enduring that hasn't
been replaced by something better. Although wheels themselves
continuously evolve - haven't seen wood, tallow lubricated wheel hubs in
a while ...
You keep using the word "replaced" as if you believe that something was replaced. But all you've said was something was removed that was working.
You keep using the word "replaced" as if you believe that something was
replaced. But all you've said was something was removed that was working.
To be clear, the functionality remains, the form of it remains.
Like wheels today use steel bearings lubricated with synthetic grease
and not wood lubricated with tallow.
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
You keep using the word "replaced" as if you believe that something wasTo be clear, the functionality remains, the form of it remains.
replaced. But all you've said was something was removed that was working. >>
Like wheels today use steel bearings lubricated with synthetic grease
and not wood lubricated with tallow.
In other words, your thought process was absurd because they removed it.
They didn't replace it with anything. YOU REPLACED IT WITH SOMETHING.
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
You keep using the word "replaced" as if you believe that something wasTo be clear, the functionality remains, the form of it remains.
replaced. But all you've said was something was removed that was working. >>
Like wheels today use steel bearings lubricated with synthetic grease
and not wood lubricated with tallow.
In other words, your thought process was absurd because they removed it.
They didn't replace it with anything. YOU REPLACED IT WITH SOMETHING.
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
I only needed to search for 30 seconds.
You win - 100 points! Congratulations!!!!
Instead of blurting childish insults why not just apologize for being wrong >>> and for not thinking before you posted what you posted about aux ports?
"You win" is not enough?
Whatever you say is "enough" if you get into your thick skull that most Android models sold today have the very useful ports, slots & radios.
On 2023-11-26 23:59, Alan wrote:[...]
But what percentage of people USE those ports?
What percentage uses any particular feature or app?
Does a feature need to have 90% usage in order not not be removed?
Does a feature need to have 90% usage in order not not be removed?
Features get removed when vendors realize, that they still can sell a
product without it. The number of people who use that feature is
irrelevant as long as they still buy devices without it.
On 4/12/2023, Arno Welzel wrote:
Does a feature need to have 90% usage in order not not be removed?
Features get removed when vendors realize, that they still can sell a
product without it. The number of people who use that feature is
irrelevant as long as they still buy devices without it.
But that's not what is happening here because most Android phones have it.
So Android resale values don't have to add buying what was removed.
What's happening here is nobody who is on Android is complaining about the loss of the functionality - it's only the Apple people who are complaining.
And that makes sense because only the Apple phones don't have it at all. That's why Apple resale value has to account for buying what was removed.
The Apple people have lost no functionality.
On 12/4/2023 8:32 PM, Alan wrote:
The Apple people have lost no functionality.
Your argument that it has "lost no functionality" is absurd.
Especially given Apple removed all basic hardware (which includes
not only basic jacks, but also slots, radios, & chargers).
Try this in order to understand why your argument is ridiculous.
Take a phone that has the aux port and plug that port with cement.
How do you do what the port did for you without buying more stuff?
If you buy more stuff just to make it work, then add that to the resale
value calculations. Otherwise, the resale value is a complete farce.
An iPhone is always going to cost more than Android when you take into account the total costs of ownership of constantly making it work again.
After Apple removes all basic hardware (jacks, slots, radios, chargers).
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 02:19:56 |
| Calls: | 6,666 |
| Calls today: | 4 |
| Files: | 12,212 |
| Messages: | 5,335,604 |
