On 9/2/2021 10:51 AM, RabidHussar wrote:

> I only had issues with a flatbed scanner which I was too stubborn to
> replace because I hardly ever used it.

I haven't needed a dedicated scanner in quite awhile. I photograph the
documents with my phone and remotely print or store them when it's
convenient. The photos can be taken virtually anywhere so you're not
locked to a scanner. The quality is actually better for me but that
would depend on your phone and/or scanner types (YMMV). Give it a try...

On 9/2/2021 1:08 PM, Robin Goodfellow wrote:

<snip>

> To the point of the SUBJECT of this thread, nospam has already claimed we're
> liars and that it's false that there are no graphical wifi debuggers on the
> iOS app store.

Sigh. Why are you obsessed with responding to these trolls? They lie
just to get a reaction from you—don't give them that satisfaction. No
one believes anything they say, so it's not like you're doing any kind
of a public service by constantly correcting them.

sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> asked
> Has there ever been a mobile phone that included an AM radio?

This Android chart came up on my first search results: It shows AM.
<https://source.android.com/devices/automotive/radio>

But I've never seen AM radio on any phone (just FM on most I've owned).
<https://www.google.com/search?q=android+why+fm+radio+but+not+am>

To understand the answer is to better understand the hardware situation.
<https://www.reddit.com/r/Android/comments/mlx9z/best_am_radio_app_that_doesnt_use_internet/>

Or the market.
<https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/unlock-the-secret-fm-tuner-in-your-android-phone/>

> Since Apple forgot to include an FM radio in the iPhone

This hit from that search says "Apple has refused calls to enable the FM
radios in their iPhones" which is why FM radio is _impossible_ on newer
iPhones. https://www.alphr.com/listen-fm-radio-android/

> there used to
> be a device to add an FM radio to an iPhone or iPod but it was for the
> previous style 30 pin connector, see
> <https://www.amazon.com/dp/B004TGSMMY>. There is no such device for
> newer, Lightning-equipped, iPhones, that plays through the devices
> speakers, but there once was some Lightning earbuds with an FM radio
> built in <https://9to5mac.com/2018/10/30/fm-radio/>, I'd be surprised if
> they sold more than a few of either of these products.

I found it interesting that the cnet article said you can plug into an
Android phone just the wire as an antenna and toggle sound to the speaker.

They suggested the "Next Radio" tool, but I wouldn't use any tool that has
ads (if I needed this functionality, I'd find the best ad free tool tho).
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.nextradioapp.nextradio

If we don't know _why_ AM radio isn't included on Android, and if we don't
know why neither FM nor AM radio is on later iPhones, we know nothing.

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> asked
>> I'm no audiophile, but you haven't shown any evidence that a wired
>> connection is any worse than the over-the-air connection Apple forces upon
>> all its recent iPhone owners.
>
> apple doesn't force any such thing.

Oh Good. Thank you for being so honest with us. And helpful. And truthful.

According to your wild goose chase, we can all now use our wired 3.5mm
headphones with all the new iPhones which completely lack the headphone
jack, right?
> wired headphones work perfectly fine with every iphone, and were even
> included until last year. that stopped because everyone has at least
> one set, usually several.

In your desperation to absolve Apple for the "courageous" move to increase
profits at the expense of the headphone jack, you are playing silly games.

You know we're talking about the industry standard H-E-A-D-P-H-O-N-E jack.
You know. The hole. The thing on 99.5% of all Android phones. Al-u-min-i-um.
This thing <https://youtu.be/oJZuSVl5wjM>.
The power of ten millions suns. Yes. The perfect 3.5mm hole. 1/8th inch too.

> android phones have started to not have *any* ports at all, which means
> you are forced to use wireless headphones and wireless charging.

It's one of your desperation tricks to dig up the 0.05% of the Android
phones which copy Apple sleazy marketing tricks when you know 99.5% of all
Android phones have this basic standard functionality.

"Precisely 3.5 millimeters in diameter. Forged and machined from the finest
premium grade copper and iron. Housed in a unibody of dicast Al-u-min-i-u-m.
Engineered for optimal haptic feedback to deliver the satisfying feeling of
click. A circle, yes. But also a hole. A tiny black hole with the
gravitational pull of a trillion collapsed stars."
https://youtu.be/oJZuSVl5wjM?t=42

> <https://www.pcmag.com/news/meizu-zero-phone-has-no-ports-or-buttons>
> The Meizu Zero differentiates itself from the competition by having
> no buttons and none of the holes you'd typically expect to find on a
> phone. That means no holes for the speakers, nowhere to insert a
> SIM card, and no ports for charging or inserting your headphone cable.

It's a classic trick of yours, nospam, to blame everything on anyone but
Apple, where there are so many Android manufacturers out there you're bound
to find the one half of one percent who copy Apple's sleazy tricks.

It just proves how _desperate_ you are to absolve Apple of responsibility.

On 9/2/2021 1:02 PM, Robin Goodfellow wrote:
> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> asked
>> although he refuses to correct anything, at least others can see that
>> he is consistently wrong and full of shit.
>
> To the point of the SUBJECT of this thread, we're all waiting for you to
> name just one graphical wifi debugging app on the iOS app store nospam.

Why do you goad him like that? What's the upside?

Here's the thing. Even though our favorite trolls are very upset about
constantly being proven wrong, the reality is that they are learning a
great deal from being here. Making such a big deal about their errors is
counter-productive. Gently point out that they are wrong, and provide
the correct information. Always use references and citations. One thing
that infuriates them about the document I prepared is that it is so
exhaustively referenced and fact-checked so they can't dispute anything
that's there.

RabidHussar <rabid@huss.ar> asked
>> A decent set of headphones can be wired, can they not?
>
> They can, but the connection remains analog and while the sound quality
> is still great, it will never be as great as a digital one. I prefer
> wired myself, if only to remove the necessity to charge.

Given all but one half of one percent of all Android phones have the
industry standard 3.5mm headphone jack, what's to stop those 99.5% of users
from _also_ having the choice of digital output if they want that too?

sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> asked
> The newer headphones I bought, for traveling, are both wireless and
> wired. You want wired headphones for traveling to be able to plug them
> into the airplane's entertainment system.

Exactly.

You want the _choice_ of both; which 99.5% of Android phones give you.

*_Y-O-U_ choose wired or wireless; not Apple!*

Apple will automatically choose the most expensive solution for you.

sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> asked
> Sigh. Why are you obsessed with responding to these trolls? They lie
> just to get a reaction from you�Xdon't give them that satisfaction. No
> one believes anything they say, so it's not like you're doing any kind
> of a public service by constantly correcting them.

This is true. (I should spend more time solving our PG&E power outages,
which, as you're likely aware, were eight in the month of August alone).

I've plonked Snit, for example, and Alan Baker (for his IQ of about 40).
Rod Speed also (his serious death threats are a no no in my book).

There are only two reasons I don't add the rest to the killfile.
1. I try to learn why they're so strange (they're unlike normal people).
2. Once in a while, nospam actually can add value (if he wants to).

While it's impossible for Jolly Roger, Joerg Lorenz, Alan Browne, Lewis, et.
al to add value, they _teach_ me how their strange minds work.

But you are correct.

I should likely ignore them all as I fall into the old rule that sometimes
even intelligent people won't be able to tell the difference.

The fact remains:
It's only iOS which is missing all this standard functionality.
The reason is simple: Apple doesn't allow it.

The question is why?

Robin Goodfellow <Ancient-of-Days@Heaven.Net> asked
> A. The _market_ determines what apps are written for both platforms
> B. Apple severely limits what apps are available; Google can't.
>
> If people do NOT understand this, then they don't understand the OS.

BTW, to keep with the goal of U-N-D-E-R-S-T-A-N-D-I-N-G OS differences...
Apple _can_ (and does) block what app functionality the market can provide.
Google can't.

IMHO: That's the fundamental difference between iOS & all other OS's.

We already know graphical cellular & WiFi debuggers are _impossible_ on iOS.
We already know why.
Apple limits them; Google doesn't.

To expound on that fundamental D-I-F-F-E-R-E-N-C-E between OS's, note that:

a. Google _tries_ to limit FOSS YouTube ad-free clone apps from Google Play.
b. But Google can't limit them because they exist _outside_ of Google Play.
c. For example this is YouTube on steroids, for free, with _no ads ever_.
<https://newpipe.net/>

In my humble opinion, anyone using the YouTube app is a moron given how
fantastic this app is compared to the piece of shit YouTube app itself.

Another example where Google _tries_ to limit an ad is NetGuard.
a. Google _tries_ to limit the FOSS NetGuard ad-blocking firewall app
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=eu.faircode.netguard>
b. But Google can't limit it because it also exists _outside_ of GP.
<https://github.com/M66B/NetGuard>
c. For example this is NetGuard with the functionality removed on GP.
<https://www.netguard.me/>

None of this is available for iOS due to Apple blocking the functionality.
If people don't UNDERSTAND this difference - they know NOTHING about the OS.

Apple _can_ (and does) block what app functionality the market can provide.
Google can't.

IMHO: That's the fundamental difference between iOS & all other OS's.

sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> asked
> One thing
> that infuriates them about the document I prepared is that it is so
> exhaustively referenced and fact-checked so they can't dispute anything
> that's there.

You and I have _both_ iOS and Android so the cultists can't snow us easily.

As a result, my information is almost never wrong.
Likewise, your document _is_ rather well done of differences that matter.

Those dozen or so Apple cultists must hate that.
And it's why, perhaps, they hate us.

So be it.
They've never even once (in decades) found my facts to be wrong.
Your document is yet another step in UNDERSTANDING differences between OS's.

You concentrate more than I do on the differences in functionality that is
on both platforms (which has value, I'm not saying it doesn't - as it does).

I concentrate mostly on simply what's completely _missing_ from iOS that is
on Android (and, if possible, vice versa since I'm never afraid of facts).
https://i.postimg.cc/4xgmTTgm/wifi01.jpg

To my knowledge, nobody has ever posted _any_ app functionality on iOS which
is not on Android, although they've posted tons of functionality that is on
both where they feel the Apple version is better (which is what you focus
on).

I focus on what's _impossible_ on iOS that is easily done on Android.
Like, oh, um, er, like Graphical Wi-Fi debugging of your home wifi network.
https://i.postimg.cc/Hn05bQwG/wifi02.jpg

In article <sgr58n$rhl$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

> > On other trips, there's no mobile coverage, so no mobile data, so no
> > audio/music streaming.
>
> In the areas with no mobile coverage you also probably have no FM radio
> stations available either.

actually, there's a very good chance there will be cellular coverage in
areas where there is little to no terrestrial radio.

this is particularly true in rural states such as nebraska and wyoming,
especially along the highways.

any terrestrial radio in such areas that might exist is often only a
couple of stations and they're usually not anything of interest.

that's why streaming audio has such a clear advantage, plus any stored
content on the device itself.

on the other hand, not having terrestrial radio has an advantage for
those who use fm transmitters to connect their device to the vehicle's
sound system.

fm transmitters are no longer as important as they once were, given
that many vehicles directly support smartphones, without the need for
any adapters or cables.

In article <sgrd2u.bns.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>, Frank Slootweg
<this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:

> > sms filters out and insults anyone who tells him he's wrong,
>
> false.

not false.

he's been doing exactly that for a couple of decades.

i'm in his crosshairs because i consistently prove him wrong, going
back many years.

>
> > sms also falsely claims that people don't post links to refute him.
>
> false.

not false.

people provide numerous links, but after a while, it gets repetitive
and tiresome to keep posting links every single time.

he follows the playbook which states if you say things enough times,
people start to believe it. that is why it's so important to refute his
bullshit.

one example includes his repeated and easily debunked claim that
in-screen fingerprint sensors are very secure. they are not. i've
posted many, many links that show just how easy it is to spoofed them
and that they are also slow and unreliable.

everyone i know who has a phone with an in-screen fingerprint scanner
complains about it.

here's just two of *many* such links:

<https://www.androidcentral.com/in-screen-fingerprint-sensors-suck>
So far, the implementation of both these technologies has
left...well...a lot to be desired.

Being slower than regular fingerprint sensors is the best case
scenario. The worst is having these in-screen sensors regularly
misread your fingerprint, requiring you to give multiple attempts
before your phone finally unlocks.

<https://www.businessinsider.com/samsung-galaxy-s10-fingerprint-sensor-t
ricked-using-3d-printer-2019-4>
A Galaxy S10 owner with a 3D printer and a photo of his own
fingerprint was able to spoof the ultrasonic in-display fingerprint
sensor on his smartphone ‹ and he said he can do it in "15 minutes."

the galaxy s21 uses a later generation sensor, which is a bit better,
but it's still nowhere near as secure or reliable as a dedicated
fingerprint sensor, which is not as secure as apple's face id,
currently the most secure biometric system available.

the galaxy s21 has also been a sales disappointment, so even though
it's a little bit better, it's still a very, very tiny percentage of
devices with the new sensor.

<https://www.androidauthority.com/samsung-galaxy-s21-sales-2729937/>
Samsung Galaxy S21 records worst sales in years sparking internal
company review

Sales of the Galaxy S21 phones are reportedly 20% lower than the S20
and 47% lower than the S10 series.

it's quite likely that part of that is because the fingerprint sensor
is not good.

some of his claims are so fucked up that there is no need to post a
link to refute it, such as the absurd claim that face id needs ambient
light. anyone who has ever used face id knows this to be completely and
utterly false. it ranks right up there with the earth is flat.

> > he thinks he knows more about apple and their products than those who
> > have been using apple products for years. he does not. he even made the
> > ridiculous claim that he has more experience with apple than anyone in
> > the apple newsgroups.
>
> cite?

In article <sf14qm$4tu$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
> The ironic thing is that I like Apple, for multiple reasons, and I've
> dealt with them far more than anyone else in the iPhone Usenet group,
> and was invited to two of their product launches at Steve Jobs Theater.

he was invited because of politics, not because he has dealt with apple
for any extended length of time.

there's also this gem from two years ago:

In article <qqu80m$u73$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
> I finally made "The List," and I thought I was being gracious by
> pointing out that in reality he often posts factual information,
> actually he is at about 60% accuracy. He can strive for 100% factual
> information. I have achieved that, but it's a high bar.

In article <sgr4a9$ak9$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

> On 9/2/2021 9:49 AM, Robin Goodfellow wrote:
> > *The fact remains there is _zero_ app functionality on iOS not on Android.
>
> Not quite true.

very much *not* true.

the amount of functionality on ios that is not on android is
substantial.

there is also functionality on android not on ios, but it's much less
than the reverse.

sometimes a desktop computer is required for a given task, just as
there are tasks that smartphones can do that desktop computers cannot.

no device is perfect in every situation.

'arlen'/'robin goodfellow' might not care about what ios can do that
android cannot, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist or that other
people want that functionality.

> There are some iOS-only apps,

actually, there are *many* ios-only apps, for all sorts of reasons.

>
> There's also a significant difference in the capabilities of Apple
> Wallet versus Google Pay, and not withstanding the issue of California
> digital Covid-19 vaccination cards, Apple Pay has more functionality,
> and Google Pay is screwed up,

google pay is also not commonly used, even before it was recently
screwed up.

<https://www.nfcw.com/whats-new-in-payments/apple-pay-used-for-more-than-
90-of-us-mobile-wallet-debit-transactions-in-2020/>
The number of debit transactions completed using a mobile wallet in
the US rose by 51% year-on-year to approximately 2bn in 2020, with
³a noteworthy² 92% of those transactions being made with Apple Pay
and just 5% with Google Pay and 3% with Samsung Pay, according to
research published in the 2021 Debit Issuer Study.

interestingly, the graphic shows 5% samsung pay and 3% google pay, the
opposite of the what the text claims.

the graphic looks like it was copied from the report, so it's most
likely correct, but either way, it doesn't matter. reversing 3% and 5%
doesn't change anything. both are insignificant compared to 92%, and
even combined, it's still a tiny fraction.

> 4. Apple appears to have beaten Google Pay to the punch in the ability
> to store digital driver's licenses (announced yesterday)
>
> <https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2021/09/apple-announces-first-states-to-adopt-
> drivers-licenses-and-state-ids-in-wallet/>.

yep.

another thing announced yesterday is twitter's new super-follows, which
is ios-only, at least for now.

one major reason for that is because the demographics of twitter users
is mostly ios, and also because it's much easier to add support to the
ios app than it is to the android app or the web version.

<https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/product/2021/introducing-super-fo
llows>
Today we¹re excited to introduce Super Follows, a new way for people
to earn monthly revenue by sharing subscriber-only content with their
followers on Twitter
....
Right now, people in the U.S. and Canada using iOS can Super Follow
select accounts and we¹ll be rolling it out to people using iOS
globally in the next few weeks. Creators can share Super Follows
Tweets on iOS only and Super Follows Tweets can be viewed on iOS,
with Android and twitter.com coming soon. 

> It is true that there are lot of applications that are not possible on
> iOS, either because of limitations put in place by Apple on iOS and
> iPadOS or because the devices lack the necessary hardware necessary to
> support the application.

nope. it's *not* true.

that's a very easily debunked myth, which mobile app developers will
tell you, especially those who have written for or involved with both
platforms.

see above for apple wallet support for driver's licenses and twitter
super-follows, and below for matter support, all unavailable on android
at this time.

a week or so ago, i described bluetooth functionality that exists on
ios and is impossible on android.

there are many more examples where ios could do things android could
not, including being first to support bluetooth le, 64 bit processors,
retina, xdr and wide gamut displays, lidar scanner, face id, homekit,
arkit, share extensions, universal control and much more. even in-app
purchases were available on ios before android.

you have never written any mobile apps, on ios or android, let alone
been involved, therefore you are completely unaware of what actually
can be done on either platform.

put simply, you're wrong.

> On the hardware side, not even all Android phones have all the hardware
> needed for certain apps. For example ANT support is limited in Android,

ant was dead on arrival.

the industry has settled on matter.

apple is already shipping a few products with matter and in roughly a
couple of weeks, will add support to all iphones that can run ios 15.

meanwhile, matter is 'coming' to android, with no time frame given.

matter is yet another example of apple being first with new
technologies.

<https://www.theverge.com/2021/5/19/22444571/google-interconnected-matte
r-smart-home-standard-android-nest-details-io-2021>
Google¹s support for Matter is also coming to Android phones. The
company promises that it¹ll add built-in support for Matter, making
it easy to set up and control Matter-enabled smart home gadgets
through Android apps, Google Assistant, the Google Home app, and
more with ³just a few taps.²

> The most comprehensive list of feature differences is in a shared Google
> Docs document I compiled

that document is wildly incorrect, so much so that it makes the
election fraud claims look completely normal in comparison.

did you take lessons from sidney powell and rudy giuliani?

In article <sgrd0c$6b7$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

> Sigh. Why are you obsessed with responding to these trolls? They lie
> just to get a reaction from you‹don't give them that satisfaction. No
> one believes anything they say, so it's not like you're doing any kind
> of a public service by constantly correcting them.

yikes. talk about projection.

In article <sgrb7h$6od$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

> Has there ever been a mobile phone that included an AM radio?

am radio in a phone would not work for several obvious reasons.

first, the phone would cause substantial interference, making it
completely impossible for am radio to work at all.

put an am radio near a cellphone (or any modern device for that matter)
for an example of how much interference it can cause. it doesn't even
need to be that close either.

it's also why electric vehicles, such as tesla, do not include an am
radio.

second, an am radio antenna is much too big to fit inside an already
space-constrained phone. even an fm radio antenna doesn't fit, which
has to be provided externally via wired headphones.

lastly there is no demand for it. nobody is asking for it.

> Since Apple forgot to include an FM radio in the iPhone,

they didn't forget. it's intentional, because there is no demand for a
terrestrial fm radio in a phone to justify adding it.

even in phones that do offer it, it's rarely used, if it is at all.

the existence of a feature does not mean it's widely used. it's nothing
more than a checklist item.

one major reason it's not used much is the limitation of wired analog
headphones for an antenna, which means an fm radio in a phone isn't
even an option for most people in most situations.

meanwhile, iphones and android phones can receive just about all am, fm
stations, along with police/fire, atc and much more, streamed over the
internet, from anywhere in the world, without needing headphones,
making it fully compatible with bluetooth headphones or using the built
in speakers.

streaming audio even works on macs, windows pcs or anything with a
browser, no phone required.

In article <sgre26$ojr$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

> Here's the thing. Even though our favorite trolls are very upset about
> constantly being proven wrong, the reality is that they are learning a
> great deal from being here. Making such a big deal about their errors is
> counter-productive. Gently point out that they are wrong, and provide
> the correct information. Always use references and citations.

'references and citations' do not matter to you because you ignore
anything that proves you wrong, insisting that you're correct, despite
extensive evidence to the contrary.

> One thing
> that infuriates them about the document I prepared is that it is so
> exhaustively referenced and fact-checked so they can't dispute anything
> that's there.

you're delusional if you actually believe that statement.

you know full well that your 'document' is full of deliberate lies and
disinformation, done solely to troll.

all of it is easily refuted, and has been, with 'references and
citations' that you claim are so important.

a few items are correct, but overall it's nothing more than bullshit.

In article <sgred3$1ks2$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Robin Goodfellow
<Ancient-of-Days@Heaven.Net> wrote:

>
> *_Y-O-U_ choose wired or wireless; not Apple!*

*all* iphones support both wired and wireless headphones. full stop.

anyone who claims otherwise is lying, or in your case, just stupid.

Anyone instantly see the fatal flaw in this infamous Snit video?
https://youtu.be/7QaABa6DFIo
I did.

Yet none of the Apple people did.
Certainly Snit didn't. (Not even Frank Slootweg did.)

There's a fatal flaw (always) in their arguments, visible in seconds.
I can see it (because I'm intelligent).

Can you?

On 9/2/2021 2:06 PM, Robin Goodfellow wrote:
> sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> asked
>> The newer headphones I bought, for traveling, are both wireless and
>> wired. You want wired headphones for traveling to be able to plug them
>> into the airplane's entertainment system.
>
> Exactly.
>
> You want the _choice_ of both; which 99.5% of Android phones give you.
>
> *_Y-O-U_ choose wired or wireless; not Apple!*
>
>
> Apple will automatically choose the most expensive solution for you.

Considering that the Lightning to 3.5mm adapter is one of the largest
selling Apple SKUs of all time, a lot of people are still using a less
expensive solution than Bluetooth earbuds or Bluetooth headphones.

Also, you can get a good pair of Bluetooth earbuds these days for under
$15, complete with USB-C charging. There are lower-end ones available
for under $8. These don't have active-noise cancellation of course.

Of course the removal of the 3.5mm headphone jack was largely to
encourage the sale of AirPods, but companies do this kind of
decontenting all the time, in order to market accessory products. Have
you bought a higher-end bicycle in the past ten years? They often don't
come with pedals, with the explanation being that different riders want
different types of pedals.

On 2021-09-02 5:04 p.m., Robin Goodfellow wrote:
> RabidHussar <rabid@huss.ar> asked
>>> A decent set of headphones can be wired, can they not?
>>
>> They can, but the connection remains analog and while the sound quality
>> is still great, it will never be as great as a digital one. I prefer
>> wired myself, if only to remove the necessity to charge.
>
> Given all but one half of one percent of all Android phones have the
> industry standard 3.5mm headphone jack, what's to stop those 99.5% of users
> from _also_ having the choice of digital output if they want that too?

Honestly, that's a very good argument.

I notice that Apple believes that they should be the ones making that
decision for us and that they insist everything should go through their
Lightning port. It's almost as if they removed the 3.5mm port not
because they wanted to give their users a better audio quality (their
excuse) but because they wanted to force people to recognize its use for
that purpose as well as buy new peripherals compatible with it. Apple
users will probably go ahead and gladly buy new headphones which uses
the Lightning port, and then buy another pair the next year when they
remove the Lightning port for no good reason and replace it with a
completely-incompatible but "so much better" new format.

--
@RabidHussar

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> asked
>> Since Apple forgot to include an FM radio in the iPhone,
>
> they didn't forget. it's intentional, because there is no demand for a
> terrestrial fm radio in a phone to justify adding it.

And yet, almost all Android phones have the FM radio that Apple forgot.

Instead of Apple choosing the best option (for Apple) - with the FM radio in
almost all Android phones, the user can choose the best option
(for themselves).

Funny the way choice works in all things except for Apple.

In article <sgrhmd$p1r$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

> Of course the removal of the 3.5mm headphone jack was largely to
> encourage the sale of AirPods,

false on its face.

apple included headphones in the box, eliminating any need to buy
airpods or anything else for that matter.

the only difference was the connector changed, something that doesn't
matter to anyone except trolls.

airpods sell exceptionally well on their own, without any need for
encouragement, so much so that when they were announced, they were
backordered for months until supply could catch up.

In article <sgri1t$13bh$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Robin Goodfellow
<Ancient-of-Days@Heaven.Net> wrote:

> And yet, almost all Android phones have the FM radio

no they don't.

RabidHussar <rabid@huss.ar> asked
> It's almost as if Apple removed the 3.5mm port not
> because they wanted to give their users a better audio quality (their
> excuse) but because they wanted to force people to recognize its use for
> that purpose as well as buy new peripherals compatible with it.

Why would Apple do something "courageous" like removing a standard port?

The Google Pixel 5a with 5G isn't courageous; it's downright cowardly!
https://youtu.be/oJZuSVl5wjM?t=83

We need to chastise all the Android OEMs for making 99.5% of all Android
phones with that cowardly headphone jack. <https://youtu.be/oJZuSVl5wjM>

"Designed for well connected 1/8th inch 3 pole TRS and 4 pole TRRS
connections. A glorious achievement. That draws from our past as it propels
you into the future. (whisper... "it's a headphone jack") Yes. It's a
headphone jack. With the Google Pixel 5a with 5G, the circle has finally
come full circle... <wait for it>... Al-u-min-i-um!"

On 2021-09-02 5:13 p.m., Robin Goodfellow wrote:
> sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> asked
>> Sigh. Why are you obsessed with responding to these trolls? They lie
>> just to get a reaction from you—don't give them that satisfaction. No
>> one believes anything they say, so it's not like you're doing any kind
>> of a public service by constantly correcting them.
>
> This is true. (I should spend more time solving our PG&E power outages,
> which, as you're likely aware, were eight in the month of August alone).
>
> I've plonked Snit, for example, and Alan Baker (for his IQ of about 40).

Cite please!

> Rod Speed also (his serious death threats are a no no in my book).
>
> There are only two reasons I don't add the rest to the killfile.
> 1. I try to learn why they're so strange (they're unlike normal people).
> 2. Once in a while, nospam actually can add value (if he wants to).

I find nospam to be rude as Hell but, honestly, he's quite
knowledgeable. If he's a fan of Apple, that's fine by me as long as he
doesn't lie to himself and believe that the company is infinitely
ethical. I'm sure they've improved their practises over the years but,
at the very core, they're the same dirtbags they've always been.

> While it's impossible for Jolly Roger, Joerg Lorenz, Alan Browne, Lewis, et.
> al to add value, they _teach_ me how their strange minds work.
>
> But you are correct.
>
> I should likely ignore them all as I fall into the old rule that sometimes
> even intelligent people won't be able to tell the difference.
>
> The fact remains:
> It's only iOS which is missing all this standard functionality.
> The reason is simple: Apple doesn't allow it.
>
> The question is why?

Because it would prevent them from selling a new device, the following
year, to their faithful users. The strategy seems to be to remove all of
those features and then restore just one every year. :)

--
@RabidHussar