(Note crosspost.)
I've seen bluetooth keyboards about the size of a small TV remote:
https://www.amazon.com/Miritz-Wireless-Keyboard-Touchpad-Control/dp/B01LZIIH24/
Anyone know of such a thing at a not-too-outrageous price?
(Note crosspost.)
I've seen bluetooth keyboards about the size of a small TV remote:
https://www.amazon.com/Miritz-Wireless-Keyboard-Touchpad-Control/dp/B01LZIIH24/
That size is perfect, but I'd really prefer USB not bluetooth. USB just works, and bluetooth just has pairing issues so often. I'm not looking
for "large enough to touchtype on" but I am looking for QWERTY and
basic shell and vi keys.
My usage would be for both Raspberry Pi and for Android. I did some web searches and found a ~4 year old forum post with a recomendation
specifically for Pi use, but (a) that product is discontinued and (b) it
was much larger anyway, more than twice as tall and twice as wide.
Anyone know of such a thing at a not-too-outrageous price?
Elijah
------
might consider smaller keyboards, too
On 14/04/2022 00:11, Eli the Bearded wrote:
(Note crosspost.)
I've seen bluetooth keyboards about the size of a small TV remote:
https://www.amazon.com/Miritz-Wireless-Keyboard-Touchpad-Control/dp/B01LZIIH24/
That size is perfect, but I'd really prefer USB not bluetooth. USB just
works, and bluetooth just has pairing issues so often. I'm not looking
for "large enough to touchtype on" but I am looking for QWERTY and
basic shell and vi keys.
My usage would be for both Raspberry Pi and for Android. I did some web
searches and found a ~4 year old forum post with a recomendation
specifically for Pi use, but (a) that product is discontinued and (b) it
was much larger anyway, more than twice as tall and twice as wide.
Anyone know of such a thing at a not-too-outrageous price?
Elijah
------
might consider smaller keyboards, too
I have two of these, I can use them on anything with a USB socket.
(Search term 'wireless mini keyboard i8 air mouse keypad')
(Note crosspost.)
I've seen bluetooth keyboards about the size of a small TV remote:
https://www.amazon.com/Miritz-Wireless-Keyboard-Touchpad-Control/dp/B01LZIIH24/
That size is perfect, but I'd really prefer USB not bluetooth.
I have a mouse that is switchable between 2.4 GHz and Bluetooth, and it
comes with a 2.4 GHz receiver. But the mini-keyboards I've seen are all
one or the other, and not switchable.
Part of the confusion is that what he really appears to not want is a Bluetooth keyboard. It is true that Bluetooth can sometimes be
problematic in terms of pairing and also in terms of power consumption.
The link the original poster provided was not for a Bluetooth keyboard
it was for a 2.4 GHz keyboard with its own receiver. In my experience
These are much less finicky than a Bluetooth keyboard.
There's no
Bluetooth pairing required and it will work with most any Android or
other device (except of course iOS devices with Lightning ports).
The upside of a Bluetooth keyboard and/or mouse is that there's no need
for a USB receiver module.
Didn't nospam advocate for iPhone dongles to replace the missing aux port?
no, nor has there ever been an 'aux port' to go missing.
Semantics.
What do you want to call the "courageous" missing port then?
And why did you advocate for dongles to replace that missing functionality?
Didn't nospam advocate for iPhone dongles to replace the missing aux port?
your experience is different than the rest of the world, plus those
dongles are often lost, rendering such a keyboard or mouse completely useless.
Didn't nospam advocate for iPhone dongles to replace the missing aux port?
no, nor has there ever been an 'aux port' to go missing.
(Note crosspost.)
I've seen bluetooth keyboards about the size of a small TV remote:
https://www.amazon.com/Miritz-Wireless-Keyboard-Touchpad-Control/dp/B01LZIIH24/
That size is perfect, but I'd really prefer USB not bluetooth. USB just works, and bluetooth just has pairing issues so often. I'm not looking
for "large enough to touchtype on" but I am looking for QWERTY and
basic shell and vi keys.
In article <t39qae$12jc$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:
Didn't nospam advocate for iPhone dongles to replace the missing aux port? >>>no, nor has there ever been an 'aux port' to go missing.
Semantics.
nope.
What do you want to call the "courageous" missing port then?
analog headphone jack, which is not the same as an 'aux port'.
And why did you advocate for dongles to replace that missing functionality?
i didn't, mainly because there is no need for any dongle.
the headphones *in* *the* *box* plugged directly into the phone without needing anything extra.
nospam wrote:
In article <t39qae$12jc$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:
Didn't nospam advocate for iPhone dongles to replace the missing
aux port?
no, nor has there ever been an 'aux port' to go missing.
Semantics.
nope.
A GSM Arena search <https://www.gsmarena.com/search.php3?> calls it:
"3.5mm jack"
What do you want to call the "courageous" missing port then?
analog headphone jack, which is not the same as an 'aux port'.
A search shows 6,476 "courageous" phones that have the industry standard functionality of the 3.5mm jack which does many things which are
_impossible_ do to without (just as an sd card does useful things which
are impossible to do without).
This is a list of the phones that support the industry standard 3.5mm jack. <https://www.gsmarena.com/results.php3?chk35mm=selected>
Unfortunately the laughably primitive latest iPhones aren't in that list.
Hell, there's not even a _single_ iPhone ever made with a modern battery.
And modern functionality of a fast charger is missing from the iPhone box.
So are the missing headphones which made Apple tens of billions of dollars!
Nobody ever said Apple wasn't a MARKETING powerhouse of the finest order.
One by one, Apple's strategy is to _cripple_ the laughably archaic iPhone.
So that you're forced to buy back basic functionality Apple has removed.
And why did you advocate for dongles to replace that missing
functionality?
i didn't, mainly because there is no need for any dongle.
Apple removed the basic industry standard functionality of a wired headset.
If Apple hadn't removed the basic functionality, there wouldn't be the
need.
the headphones *in* *the* *box* plugged directly into the phone without
needing anything extra.
What headphones comes *in the box" with the latest iPhones, nospam?
Apple removed the basic industry standard functionality of a wired headset.
Apple removed the basic industry standard functionality of a wired headset.
they didn't remove any functionality. they simply switched to a digital headphone jack and included wired headsets in the box that plugged
directly into the phone, *without* any adapters or dongles.
Apple pulls these marketing tricks to make you buy back what they removed.
there's nothing to buy back and apple *added* functionality not
previously present.
In article <t3a2k4$gob$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:
Apple removed the basic industry standard functionality of a wired
headset.
they didn't remove any functionality. they simply switched to a digital
nospam wrote:
Apple removed the basic industry standard functionality of a wired
headset.
they didn't remove any functionality. they simply switched to a digital
headphone jack and included wired headsets in the box that plugged
directly into the phone, *without* any adapters or dongles.
You proved my point for me.
Apple pulls these marketing tricks to make you buy back what they removed.
Apple pulls these marketing tricks to make you buy back what they removed.
nospam wrote:
Apple pulls these marketing tricks to make you buy back what they
removed.
there's nothing to buy back and apple *added* functionality not
previously present.
a. Apple's strategy is to slowly remove basic functionality - one at a
time.
b. Each year Apple gives a _different_ excuse for the loss of
functionality.
c. Yet, it's always so that you must _buy_ the missing functionality back.
Besides... 1. How did Apple "add" functionality when they _never_ had
the in-device _portable_ storage capacity that almost all other phones have?
2. How did Apple "add" functionality when Apple _removed_ the industry standard 3.5mm jack which never negated bluetooth if people wanted it?
3. How did Apple "add" functionality by subsequently removing the
headphones
from the box which they needed to add when they removed the 3.5mm jack?
4. How did Apple "add" functionality when they then removed the charging
brick from the box so now people have to shop for a proper fast charger?
5. How did Apple "add" functionality when they _crippled_ webkit so that it
can't possibly have the privacy functionality of the Tor Browser?
The list can go on forever given the reason the iPhone is crippled in app functionality isn't the lack of hardware so much as the lack of the ability of developers to meet demand because Apple _refuses_ to allow them in the
App Store.
Apple cripples iOS by preventing app functionality.
There's a ton of useful app functionality on Android that isn't on iOS.
On 2022-04-15 11:17 a.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
nospam wrote:
Apple removed the basic industry standard functionality of a wired
headset.
they didn't remove any functionality. they simply switched to a
digital headphone jack and included wired headsets in the box that
plugged directly into the phone, *without* any adapters or dongles.
You proved my point for me.
Apple pulls these marketing tricks to make you buy back what they
removed.
Apple replaced one method of connecting headphones/earbuds with another.
Apple removed the basic industry standard functionality of a wired headset.
they didn't remove any functionality. they simply switched to a digital
Yes they did - specifically they removed the ability to use
analogue headphones/headsets.
Apple replaced one method of connecting headphones/earbuds with another.
On 2022-04-15 11:56 a.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
nospam wrote:
Apple pulls these marketing tricks to make you buy back what they
removed.
there's nothing to buy back and apple *added* functionality not
previously present.
a. Apple's strategy is to slowly remove basic functionality - one at a
time.
b. Each year Apple gives a _different_ excuse for the loss of
functionality.
c. Yet, it's always so that you must _buy_ the missing functionality
back.
Besides... 1. How did Apple "add" functionality when they _never_ had
the in-device _portable_ storage capacity that almost all other
phones have?
2. How did Apple "add" functionality when Apple _removed_ the industry
standard 3.5mm jack which never negated bluetooth if people wanted it?
It's not an industry standard.
GSMArena shows 2519 phones currently available or coming soon.
Only 1994 have a 3.5mm audio jack.
3. How did Apple "add" functionality by subsequently removing the
headphones
from the box which they needed to add when they removed the 3.5mm
jack?
Not including an accessory is NOT "remov[ing] basic functionality".
4. How did Apple "add" functionality when they then removed the
charging
brick from the box so now people have to shop for a proper fast
charger?
Same rebuttal.
5. How did Apple "add" functionality when they _crippled_ webkit so
that it
can't possibly have the privacy functionality of the Tor Browser?
Choosing not to do something is not removing functionality.
The list can go on forever given the reason the iPhone is crippled in
app functionality isn't the lack of hardware so much as the lack of the
ability of developers to meet demand because Apple _refuses_ to allow
them in the App Store.
Apple cripples iOS by preventing app functionality.
There's a ton of useful app functionality on Android that isn't on iOS.
In article <t3cffi$nda$1@dont-email.me>, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
Apple replaced one method of connecting headphones/earbuds with
another.
yep, and one that has more functionality and better reliability than
what it replaced.
sales went *up*, which means nobody cared, other than a tiny, yet very
vocal minority of apple haters who have nothing better to do than bash.
and why is this crossposted to raspberry pi anyway? it has absolutely
nothing to do with raspberry pi, but since it is, the raspberry pi zero doesn't have an analog headphone jack, nor does it come with a power
adapter either. think about that, a computer that doesn't come with a
power adapter.
Apple removed the basic industry standard functionality of a wired
headset.
they didn't remove any functionality. they simply switched to a digital
Yes they did - specifically they removed the ability to use
analogue headphones/headsets.
because digital headphones offer more features and better reliability.
Apple replaced one method of connecting headphones/earbuds with another.
yep, and one that has more functionality and better reliability than
what it replaced.
sales went *up*, which means nobody cared, other than a tiny, yet very
vocal minority of apple haters who have nothing better to do than bash.
and why is this crossposted to raspberry pi anyway? it has absolutely
nothing to do with raspberry pi, but since it is, the raspberry pi zero doesn't have an analog headphone jack, nor does it come with a power
adapter either. think about that, a computer that doesn't come with a
power adapter.
Removal of the PSU is clearly a cost saving exercise (for apple as they do not appear to pass it on to the consumer) & as Apple use proprietary
charging skts forces users who don't already have one to spend additional cash
On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 12:05:53 -0700, Alan wrote:
On 2022-04-15 11:56 a.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:so the vast majority, it is also the standard format for headphones on
nospam wrote:
Apple pulls these marketing tricks to make you buy back what they
removed.
there's nothing to buy back and apple *added* functionality not
previously present.
a. Apple's strategy is to slowly remove basic functionality - one at a
time.
b. Each year Apple gives a _different_ excuse for the loss of
functionality.
c. Yet, it's always so that you must _buy_ the missing functionality
back.
Besides... 1. How did Apple "add" functionality when they _never_ had
the in-device _portable_ storage capacity that almost all other
phones have?
2. How did Apple "add" functionality when Apple _removed_ the industry
standard 3.5mm jack which never negated bluetooth if people wanted it?
It's not an industry standard.
GSMArena shows 2519 phones currently available or coming soon.
Only 1994 have a 3.5mm audio jack.
almost all legacy audio devices. if not an actual official standard then
at lease a defacto one.
but it is removing functionality that previous models had - the point that was being made but you deliberately chose to distort it to support your
3. How did Apple "add" functionality by subsequently removing the
headphones
from the box which they needed to add when they removed the 3.5mm
jack?
Not including an accessory is NOT "remov[ing] basic functionality".
need to be contrary to the majority opinion
A charger is an accessory? only by the most pedantic of definitions as the device cannot operate without a means of charging.
4. How did Apple "add" functionality when they then removed the
charging
brick from the box so now people have to shop for a proper fast
charger?
Same rebuttal.
Removal of the PSU is clearly a cost saving exercise (for apple as they do not appear to pass it on to the consumer) & as Apple use proprietary
charging skts forces users who don't already have one to spend additional cash
5. How did Apple "add" functionality when they _crippled_ webkit so
that it
can't possibly have the privacy functionality of the Tor Browser?
Choosing not to do something is not removing functionality.
The list can go on forever given the reason the iPhone is crippled in
app functionality isn't the lack of hardware so much as the lack of the
ability of developers to meet demand because Apple _refuses_ to allow
them in the App Store.
Apple cripples iOS by preventing app functionality.
There's a ton of useful app functionality on Android that isn't on iOS.
I see that you are trying to make this news group as unbearable as others
you frequent with your deliberate attempts to provoke & continue
controversy to absurdity.
On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 12:02:10 -0700, Alan wrote:
On 2022-04-15 11:17 a.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
nospam wrote:
Apple removed the basic industry standard functionality of a wired
headset.
they didn't remove any functionality. they simply switched to a
digital headphone jack and included wired headsets in the box that
plugged directly into the phone, *without* any adapters or dongles.
You proved my point for me.
Apple pulls these marketing tricks to make you buy back what they
removed.
Apple replaced one method of connecting headphones/earbuds with another.
replaces a universal interface with a proprietary one that can only be sourced from Apple of an Apple licensed supplier.
In article <20220415194844.24fd718cf5bf6c65c3a3b8cf@eircom.net>, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
Apple removed the basic industry standard functionality of a wired headset.
they didn't remove any functionality. they simply switched to a
digital
Yes they did - specifically they removed the ability to use
analogue headphones/headsets.
because digital headphones offer more features and better reliability.
alister wrote:
Removal of the PSU is clearly a cost saving exercise (for apple as
they do not appear to pass it on to the consumer) & as Apple use
proprietary charging skts forces users who don't already have one to
spend additional cash
Apple admittedly has perhaps the finest marketing team on this planet.
Each time Apple removes basic functionality - we get a _different_ excuse.
a. Lack of sdslot - use the iCloud!
b. Loss of 3.5mm jack - it's "courageous"
c. Loss of charging brick - it's "for the kids"
etc.
Yet - all end up causing you to buy the missing functionality back!
*It causes a buying decision that never needed to be made before*
There is a recent thread on the Apple newsgroup showing factual reports
that
Apple made tens of _billions_ of dollars (in a variety of ways) by removing the basic functionality that we speak of here.
*Time to charge YOUR phone from dead to full is what?* <https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/D5mvSwHd4jM>
The estimate for 190 million devices is Apple saved in costs alone 6.5 billion dollars and then Apple made tens of billions more in increased
sales.
*Steve (sms) posted the cite to the report in this message* <https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/D5mvSwHd4jM/m/5dBK6AFyFgAJ>
Bear in mind the correct charger _nobody_ has who bought any iPhone since
the correct 20 Watt charger _never_ came in any iPhone box in Apple's
entire
history of selling billions of iPhones.
Note: Apple never tells you this. Apple "claims" you already have a
charger,
but that's like telling you that you already have old used incandescent
bulbs that you can bring over to your new house which is designed for LEDs which are what you want when you pay for a phone with 20W fast charging.
On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 15:35:39 -0400
nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
In article <20220415194844.24fd718cf5bf6c65c3a3b8cf@eircom.net>, Ahem A
Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
Apple removed the basic industry standard functionality of a wired
headset.
they didn't remove any functionality. they simply switched to a
digital
Yes they did - specifically they removed the ability to use
analogue headphones/headsets.
because digital headphones offer more features and better reliability.
That is of little interest to the owner of a set of expensive and carefully chosen headphones which are usable with just about everything except a
recent Apple phone - especially if they find Apple's offering uncomfortable.
How is it improved?
Audio is still supplied to the ear by tiny speakers receiving an analog voltage.
all that has happened is the audio decode & amplification circuits have
been removed from the phone & moved to the headphone cable.
Yes they did - specifically they removed the ability to use
analogue headphones/headsets.
because digital headphones offer more features and better reliability.
That is of little interest to the owner of a set of expensive and carefully chosen headphones which are usable with just about everything except a
recent Apple phone - especially if they find Apple's offering uncomfortable.
all that has happened is the audio decode & amplification circuits have
been removed from the phone & moved to the headphone cable.
quality is dependent on the quality of those circuits & simply removes it form Apples concerns
Apple replaced one method of connecting headphones/earbuds with another.
replaces a universal interface with a proprietary one that can only be sourced from Apple of an Apple licensed supplier.
Actually the A/D, D/A, and amplifier are still in the phone as well
because they're still needed for the phone's speakers and microphones.
They are simply duplicated in the Lightning to 3.5mm headphone adapter
(or in the very few Lightning ear pods).
The removal of the headphone jack was done for multiple reasons. First
it reduced manufacturing cost (at least after they stopped including the Lightning to 3.5mm headphone adapter).
Second, it eliminated a point of
failure since the headphone jack was one of the biggest points of
failure that was covered by the warranty or Apple Care.
Third, it
encouraged MFi devices with royalties to Apple (since the 3.5mm
headphone jack had no royalties).
Fourth, it made it easier to achieve
IP68.
Fifth, and most important, it encouraged the sale of AirPods.
Some people don't realize that the 3.5mm headphone jack was used for a
lot more than just headphones.
A lot of the peripherals that duplicate the lost functionality that used
the headphone jack have become much more expensive and much less
convenient, though some are better off using Android OTG.
Apple has now removed the only open standard port available, forcing companies to use their proprietary and royalty based Lightning connector.
It [the headphone jack] also sports a surprisingly robust three-channel communication interface:
One channel in (for the microphone) and two
channels out (for the left and right stereo channel). What not a lot of people realize is that the headphone socket also supplies a tiny amount
of power.
apple *included* headphones and an adapter, which means *nothing* extra needed to be purchased.
nospam wrote:
or google, samsung, oneplus, etc., who also do not have an analog
headphone jack anymore.
You always blame everyone but Apple for _forcing_ Apple, wholly against
their free will, to remove basic functionality from the iPhone nospam.
On 15.04.2022 22:55, nospam wrote:
apple *included* headphones and an adapter, which means *nothing* extra
needed to be purchased.
Are you sure Apple includes "headphones and an adapter" in the iPhone 13?
or google, samsung, oneplus, etc., who also do not have an analog
headphone jack anymore.
that means that headphone makers can use their own d/a converter as
well as add additional functionality that is otherwise not possible, including spatial audio, health sensors, noise cancellation that uses
the phone's noise cancellation functionality (which means no additional
cost or increase in size), as well as being significantly more
reliable.
users can also buy their own external d/a converter instead of being
limited to what the device maker decided to use.
also note that those very same people would be in the very same
predicament with many android phones, including the google pixel series
and the latest samsung phones.
nospam wrote:
also note that those very same people would be in the very same
predicament with many android phones, including the google pixel series
and the latest samsung phones.
Change that preposterous "many" to a more realistic "select few" and even
so, *why do you always proclaim that Apple marketing is driven by Google?*
Apple likely spends more than any other tech company in marketing
nospam, and yet, you always claim Apple can only _follow_ what other companies do?
apple *included* headphones and an adapter, which means *nothing* extra needed to be purchased.
Are you sure Apple includes "headphones and an adapter" in the iPhone 13?
That is of little interest to the owner of a set of expensive and carefully chosen headphones which are usable with just about everything except a
recent Apple phone - especially if they find Apple's offering uncomfortable.
That is of little interest to the owner of a set of expensive and carefully chosen headphones which are usable with just about everything except a recent Apple phone - especially if they find Apple's offering uncomfortable.
As someone who carefully chose their headphones, it should be obvious
to you (or I hope you'll do some research and figure it out) that
3.5mm TRS connectors and cables are terrible, a real worse-is-better standard. The lines aren't balanced like XLR connectors, so the wire
is extremely noise sensitive. Many 3.5mm cables aren't shielded well
either. Put a smartphone next to a 3.5mm cable, even those that come
with audiophile headphones, and you'll probably hear harmonics from
your phone modem. The TRS wiring itself depends on the contacts on the plug-connector which wear away a lot quicker than pretty much any
other connector. As an analog connector you can create capacitance at
the TRS connection itself which leads to odd frequency responses. XLR
and mini-XLR cables are much better cables than the crappy TRS
"standard" and used by audio professionals. They have firm
connections, balanced lines, and insulation between the lines that TRS connectors do not have.
The advice to put a good DAC before the headphones
serves to keep the signal high-fidelity for as long as possible. It encourages to short 3.5mm cable runs so that there's fewer
opportunities for noise, interference, or signal attenuation due to
weird capacitance issues. Really the advice to use a DAC is putting
lipstick on the TRS pig. A good solution is to either keep the signal
digital as long as possible and only translate it into analog at the
drivers or to use a purpose-built cable to carry analog signals like
XLRs.
TRS has very few advantages. One of them is that they're dirt cheap to
make. They only require thin gauge wire in their connectors. They're
easy to replace. It's relatively easy to understand what's happening
by placing probes on the contacts and seeing a waveform. They're even
simpler to modulate signals onto than a serial cable. TRS is a worse-is-better standard. It's the bare-minimum needed to run analog
signals on a wire, any wire, without offering bare wiring or aligator
clips. From a fidelity, BOM cost, or footprint perspective using a
digital connector is far superior. You can even run long cabling to
speakers and not have the severe loss issues that come with a pure
analog connector at the low voltages being output on most audio
lines.
Getting angry at Apple over this is silly (as others have noted that
many Android phones have these features as well.) Apple has always
placed itself at the upper end of the market. If any company is
willing to throw away the trash known as the TRS connector for
quality, then it will be Apple.
It is unfortunate that folks who have
headphones and headsets that connect via 3.5mm TRS cannot directly
connect anymore but they can buy a simple adapter and get the same functionality.
In the meantime the folks who are actually interested
in Hi-Fi audio can use better connectors than wires soldered into a
ring.
The fact *most phones* have the industry standard jack is _not_ a niche.
Getting angry at Apple over this is silly (as others have noted that
many Android phones have these features as well.)
meff wrote:
Getting angry at Apple over this is silly (as others have noted that
many Android phones have these features as well.)
Apologies (in advance) for being allergic to bullshit... :)
Please stop the bullshitting in defense of Apple's marketing strategies.
If you wish to be credible, then you need to get your facts correct.
Please say "select few" and not "many" since that's the facts.
Most people who don't know what they're talking about think it's a trend. It's not.
well said and all very much correct.
as it turns out, apple wasn't first smartphone maker to do so. that
title goes to the first android phone, the t-mobile g1 in 2008:
going back even further, feature phones either had a smaller 2.5mm jack
or a proprietary dock port, both of which required an adapter to use
standard headphones.
It is unfortunate that folks who have
headphones and headsets that connect via 3.5mm TRS cannot directly
connect anymore but they can buy a simple adapter and get the same
functionality.
they also represent a very, very small niche.
In the meantime the folks who are actually interested
in Hi-Fi audio can use better connectors than wires soldered into a
ring.
yep, and they're not likely to be using a smartphone as a source
anyway, making it entirely a non-issue.
The fact *most phones* have the industry standard jack is _not_ a niche.
what matters is if it's actually *used* and it is not.
the space can be better used for other things that are more useful to
more people, especially given that an analog jack is redundant.
Are you sure Apple includes "headphones and an adapter" in the iPhone 13?
note the tense.
nospam wrote:
The fact *most phones* have the industry standard jack is _not_ a niche.
what matters is if it's actually *used* and it is not.
How often do you use a USB thumb drive?
You could argue that you only use it when you need it, right?
Which might not be all that often, right?
The loss of functionality you advocate for is like Apple removing the industry standard USB-A ports on Apple computers which negates the use of a simple USB thumb drive.
On 4/14/2022 4:24 AM, Patrick wrote:
On 14/04/2022 00:11, Eli the Bearded wrote:
I've seen bluetooth keyboards about the size of a small TV remote:I have two of these, I can use them on anything with a USB socket.
https://www.amazon.com/Miritz-Wireless-Keyboard-Touchpad-Control/dp/B01LZIIH24/
That size is perfect, but I'd really prefer USB not bluetooth.
Except that he explicitly stated that he wanted a _wired_ keyboard.
Part of the confusion is that what he really appears to not want is a Bluetooth keyboard.
The upside of a Bluetooth keyboard and/or mouse is that there's no need
for a USB receiver module.
The loss of functionality you advocate for is like Apple removing the industry standard USB-A ports on Apple computers which negates the use of a simple USB thumb drive.
On 2022-04-16, Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
The loss of functionality you advocate for is like Apple removing the
industry standard USB-A ports on Apple computers which negates the use of a >> simple USB thumb drive.
Oof I'm sorry you lost your parallel port. It must have stung when
they took those industry-standard connectors out of computers for
USB.
I have a PCI par port card in one of my PCs
its the only real I/O on a PC.
Now with raspi we have GPIO, a BIG win!!!!
Apple is overpriced crap.
Nobody said anything about Apple being priced well :) I'm just here to
say the 3.5mm TRS jack is good to be dead. It was a bad connector and
it's well and good to be gone. I really don't care about Apple either
way. I'm an Android user myself and I'm _glad_ I don't have to bother
with 3.5mm jacks anymore.
On 2022-04-16, Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
The loss of functionality you advocate for is like Apple removing the
industry standard USB-A ports on Apple computers which negates the use of a >> simple USB thumb drive.
Oof I'm sorry you lost your parallel port. It must have stung when
they took those industry-standard connectors out of computers for
USB.
I have a PCI par port card in one of my PCs
its the only real I/O on a PC.
Now with raspi we have GPIO, a BIG win!!!!
Apple is overpriced crap.
Jan Panteltje wrote:
I have a PCI par port card in one of my PCs its the only real I/O on a
PC.
Now with raspi we have GPIO, a BIG win!!!!
Apple is overpriced crap.
I agree, and, more to the point of an educated astute observation...
The commonality of the raspi with almost _all_ other common consumer electronics is that every year the raspi (and most consumer electronics)
gets (a) better, (b) faster, and (c) cheaper over time.
It's only the immensely hugely marketed electronic items which don't get
(a) better, (b) faster, and (c) cheaper over time.
HINT #1: Apple spends the lowest of all of high tech in R&D, yet Apple's marketing budget is likely the largest of all high tech (bar none).
HINT #2: Guess why Apple products (which every year lose more and more functionality) get (a) worse, (b) faster, and (c) more expensive over
time?
In article <t3cjcj$1s9$2@gioia.aioe.org>, alister
<alister.ware@ntlworld.com> wrote:
Apple replaced one method of connecting headphones/earbuds with
another.
replaces a universal interface with a proprietary one that can only be
sourced from Apple of an Apple licensed supplier.
usb-c is also licensed, for the many android devices that do not have an analog headphone jack anymore.
meff wrote:
Nobody said anything about Apple being priced well :) I'm just here to
say the 3.5mm TRS jack is good to be dead. It was a bad connector and
it's well and good to be gone. I really don't care about Apple either
way. I'm an Android user myself and I'm _glad_ I don't have to bother
with 3.5mm jacks anymore.
If I assume you're a well educated person with at least an average IQ, I
will also have to assume that your thinking is based on a modicum of logic.
With that assumption in mind, I must ask how is a phone any less functional if it happens to be most phones which have the industry standard 3.5mm jack?
The Apple iKooks seem to claim any phone with the industry standard 3.5 mm jack is (somehow) less functional than a phone that doesn't have that jack.
How is that a logical sensible assessment in your well-informed opinion?
On 4/14/2022 8:45 AM, sms wrote:
<snip>
I have a mouse that is switchable between 2.4 GHz and Bluetooth, and it
comes with a 2.4 GHz receiver. But the mini-keyboards I've seen are all
one or the other, and not switchable.
Actually there is a switchable Bluetooth/2.4 GHz model, see <https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07TS7TQ8J/>.
On 2022-04-16, Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:
I have a PCI par port card in one of my PCs
its the only real I/O on a PC.
Now with raspi we have GPIO, a BIG win!!!!
Apple is overpriced crap.
Nobody said anything about Apple being priced well :) I'm just here to
say the 3.5mm TRS jack is good to be dead. It was a bad connector and
it's well and good to be gone. I really don't care about Apple either
way. I'm an Android user myself and I'm _glad_ I don't have to bother
with 3.5mm jacks anymore.
the reason is actually quite simple Apple are NOT primarily a technology company, they are a fashion house. change for the sake of change every 6 months & your customer base will buy everything again because they simply must have the latest model or die of embarrassment
How is that a logical sensible assessment in your well-informed opinion?
I for one prefer not having a 3.5mm jack on my phone (and I don't on
my Android).
I already talked about my problems with the connector in
another post.
Practically speaking, they add another failure mode to
the phone and increase its bulk.
I've had my 3.5mm connectors die on
me often and frequently, everything from one channel going dead to
gunk buildup causing attenuated audio.
I'm a pretty outdoorsy person
so that doesn't help.
The single connector design of phones without
the 3.5mm sockets make them easy to clean and maintain.
the reason is actually quite simple Apple are NOT primarily a technology company, they are a fashion house. change for the sake of change every 6 months & your customer base will buy everything again because they simply must have the latest model or die of embarrassment
alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> wrote:
the reason is actually quite simple Apple are NOT primarily a
technology company, they are a fashion house. change for the sake of
change every 6 months & your customer base will buy everything again
because they simply must have the latest model or die of embarrassment
This is a gross generalisation which might be true for a lot of people
and works well for Apple but a generalisation nonetheless. I am an old unix/linux user who switched from Windows to Apple around 2008 because
as a developer (formerly web now mostly C) it "just" works. I don't need gamer graphics but I do appreciate not running system updates for a
whole day after a week of not using a computer. And yes, I like the aesthetics of both the hardware and (mostly) the software. Linux doesn't
work for me as a day to day desktop. I like tinkering as a hobby but I
don't want to be a busy system administrator for my own system.
I only recently switched from Android to iPhone and yes I miss the
headphone jack but I got a €5 adapter. It kinda sucks but modern (high
end)
Android phones also often don't have it anymore.
alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> wrote:
the reason is actually quite simple Apple are NOT primarily a technology
company, they are a fashion house. change for the sake of change every 6
months & your customer base will buy everything again because they simply
must have the latest model or die of embarrassment
This is a gross generalisation which might be true for a lot of people and >works well for Apple but a generalisation nonetheless. I am an old
unix/linux user who switched from Windows to Apple around 2008 because as a >developer (formerly web now mostly C) it "just" works.
I don't need gamer
graphics but I do appreciate not running system updates for a whole day
after a week of not using a computer. And yes, I like the aesthetics of
both the hardware and (mostly) the software. Linux doesn't work for me as a >day to day desktop.
I like tinkering as a hobby but I don't want to be a
busy system administrator for my own system.
I only recently switched from Android to iPhone and yes I miss the
headphone jack but I got a €5 adapter. It kinda sucks but modern (high end) >Android phones also often don't have it anymore.
The upside of a Bluetooth keyboard and/or mouse is that there's no need
for a USB receiver module.
And the downside of any thing not wired is batteries and moving it
between devices. Repairing for BT or moving dongles for this 2.4 GHz
thing.
the reason is actually quite simple Apple are NOT primarily a technology company, they are a fashion house. change for the sake of change every 6 months & your customer base will buy everything again because they simply must have the latest model or die of embarrassment
Apple replaced one method of connecting headphones/earbuds with
another.
replaces a universal interface with a proprietary one that can only be
sourced from Apple of an Apple licensed supplier.
usb-c is also licensed, for the many android devices that do not have an analog headphone jack anymore.
Yep it is not just apple, others have seen that it can generate an
additional revenue stream & have adopted the same strategy
The loss of functionality you advocate for is like Apple removing the industry standard USB-A ports on Apple computers which negates the use of a simple USB thumb drive.
In article <t3ds8l$1bvi$1@gioia.aioe.org>, alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> wrote:
the reason is actually quite simple Apple are NOT primarily a technology
company, they are a fashion house. change for the sake of change every 6
months & your customer base will buy everything again because they simply
must have the latest model or die of embarrassment
that's nothing more than the usual bashing, and is demonstrably false.
Oof I'm sorry you lost your parallel port. It must have stung when
they took those industry-standard connectors out of computers for
USB.
XPost: comp.mobile.android
In article <t3d6k8$1942$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:
The fact *most phones* have the industry standard jack is _not_ a niche.
what matters is if it's actually *used* and it is not.
the space can be better used for other things that are more useful to
more people, especially given that an analog jack is redundant.
On 16/04/2022 11:41, nospam wrote:
that's nothing more than the usual bashing, and is demonstrably false.
Its demonstrably true.
that's nothing more than the usual bashing, and is demonstrably false.
Its demonstrably true.
As always, both are true.
Some value one thing more, others the other, and
some people hate everything \_(?)_/
the reason is actually quite simple Apple are NOT primarily a technology >> company, they are a fashion house. change for the sake of change every 6 >> months & your customer base will buy everything again because they simply >> must have the latest model or die of embarrassment
that's nothing more than the usual bashing, and is demonstrably false.
Its demonstrably true.
As it is of all consumer product companies. Sales are everything, no
matter what the reason for them, and consumers are by their very nature
less sophisticated buyers, for whom brand image is usually far more
relevant than performance or total lifetime cost.
Any manufacturer who wanted to sell any phone around my town must either provide the jack or an equivalent.
In comp.sys.raspberry-pi, sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
On 4/14/2022 4:24 AM, Patrick wrote:
On 14/04/2022 00:11, Eli the Bearded wrote:
I've seen bluetooth keyboards about the size of a small TV remote:I have two of these, I can use them on anything with a USB socket.
https://www.amazon.com/Miritz-Wireless-Keyboard-Touchpad-Control/dp/B01LZIIH24/
That size is perfect, but I'd really prefer USB not bluetooth.
Use them "wired" to a USB socket?
Except that he explicitly stated that he wanted a _wired_ keyboard.
Yes.
Part of the confusion is that what he really appears to not want is a
Bluetooth keyboard.
I didn't know about the 2.4 GHz connection. Maybe that's more reliable
than bluetooth, maybe not. I'd still rather the wire. (Which probably
puts me in an extreme minority.)
I didn't know about the 2.4 GHz connection. Maybe that's more reliable
than bluetooth, maybe not. I'd still rather the wire. (Which probably
puts me in an extreme minority.)
It has three advantages over Bluetooth. First, it uses less power so you won't be recharging the keyboard very often.
Second, there is no pairing
necessary, it's all automatic.
Third, it works with just about any
device with a USB port, including Android phones.
Fourth,
the connection
doesn't ever drop.
The disadvantage of 2.4GHz is that it requires a
separate receiver, though sometimes, depending on the device, so does Bluetooth.
I have a PCI par port card in one of my PCs
its the only real I/O on a PC.
Now with raspi we have GPIO, a BIG win!!!!
On 2022-04-16, Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
The loss of functionality you advocate for is like Apple removing the
industry standard USB-A ports on Apple computers which negates the use of a >> simple USB thumb drive.
Oof I'm sorry you lost your parallel port. It must have stung when
they took those industry-standard connectors out of computers for
USB.
In any case, Apple brought back the USB-A ports on the new Macbooks.
They also brought back the SD card reader and the HDMI port, and it
still has a 3.5mm headphone jack.
In article <t3eim3$pnh$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
I didn't know about the 2.4 GHz connection. Maybe that's more reliable
than bluetooth, maybe not. I'd still rather the wire. (Which probably
puts me in an extreme minority.)
It has three advantages over Bluetooth. First, it uses less power so you
won't be recharging the keyboard very often.
that is false. bluetooth uses *less* power, with some bluetooth
keyboards and mice having as much as two years on a single charge.
I didn't know about the 2.4 GHz connection. Maybe that's more reliable >>> than bluetooth, maybe not. I'd still rather the wire. (Which probably
puts me in an extreme minority.)
It has three advantages over Bluetooth. First, it uses less power so you >> won't be recharging the keyboard very often.
that is false. bluetooth uses *less* power, with some bluetooth
keyboards and mice having as much as two years on a single charge.
That is an urban legend. That is not possible.
Even if not used these devices have perhaps only a minimal residual energy.
life up to 2 years.
In article <t3e7am$7hi$1@dont-email.me>, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
the reason is actually quite simple Apple are NOT primarily a technology >>>> company, they are a fashion house. change for the sake of change every 6 >>>> months & your customer base will buy everything again because they simply >>>> must have the latest model or die of embarrassment
that's nothing more than the usual bashing, and is demonstrably false.
Its demonstrably true.
it is not.
As it is of all consumer product companies. Sales are everything, no
matter what the reason for them, and consumers are by their very nature
less sophisticated buyers, for whom brand image is usually far more
relevant than performance or total lifetime cost.
except that people buy apple products because they do what people want
them to do, not because of any mythical brand image.
performance is as good or better than the competition and total
lifetime cost is less, often by quite a bit.
<https://bgr.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/galaxy-s21-ultra-vs-iphone-1 3-pro-geekench-5-benchmark.jpg> <https://bgr.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/pixel-5-vs-iphone-13-pro-gee kench-5-benchmark.jpg>
<https://www.computerworld.com/article/3131906/ibm-says-macs-are-even-ch eaper-to-run-than-it-thought.html>
IBM today told the record-setting seventh Jamf Nation User Conference
that it is saving even more money by deploying Macs across the
company than it thought: each Mac deployment saves the company up
to $535 over four years, in contrast to the $270 per Mac it claimed
last year.
...
This is fully in line with experiences shared in 2015, when Previn
said just 5 percent of IBM¹s Mac users needed to call the help desk;
In contrast, an astonishing 40 percent of PC staff request tech
support help. At IBM last year just 25 staff supported 30,000 Macs.
life up to 2 years.
No.
And we discuss accumulators not ordinary one-way batteries which are environmental killing waste from day one and not acceptable anymore.
But even these batteries are considerably drained after a year.
In addition: These performance claims by the manufacturers are never
cross checked by anybody and are *always* unrealistic.
On 16/04/2022 15:02, nospam wrote:
In article <t3e7am$7hi$1@dont-email.me>, The Natural PhilosopherNo, they buy them because they feel safe with them and convince
<tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
the reason is actually quite simple Apple are NOT primarily a
technology
company, they are a fashion house. change for the sake of change
every 6
months & your customer base will buy everything again because they
simply
must have the latest model or die of embarrassment
that's nothing more than the usual bashing, and is demonstrably false.
Its demonstrably true.
it is not.
As it is of all consumer product companies. Sales are everything, no
matter what the reason for them, and consumers are by their very nature
less sophisticated buyers, for whom brand image is usually far more
relevant than performance or total lifetime cost.
except that people buy apple products because they do what people want
them to do, not because of any mythical brand image.
themselves that what they do is what they really wanted to do
performance is as good or better than the competition and total
lifetime cost is less, often by quite a bit.
<https://bgr.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/galaxy-s21-ultra-vs-iphone-1
3-pro-geekench-5-benchmark.jpg>
<https://bgr.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/pixel-5-vs-iphone-13-pro-gee
kench-5-benchmark.jpg>
<https://www.computerworld.com/article/3131906/ibm-says-macs-are-even-ch
eaper-to-run-than-it-thought.html>
IBM today told the record-setting seventh Jamf Nation User Conference >> that it is saving even more money by deploying Macs across the
company than it thought: each Mac deployment saves the company up
to $535 over four years, in contrast to the $270 per Mac it claimed
last year.
...
This is fully in line with experiences shared in 2015, when Previn
said just 5 percent of IBM¹s Mac users needed to call the help desk; >> In contrast, an astonishing 40 percent of PC staff request tech
support help. At IBM last year just 25 staff supported 30,000 Macs.
I have never called the help line for a knife and fork
On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 06:19:28 GMT
meff <email@example.com> wrote:
Oof I'm sorry you lost your parallel port. It must have stung when
they took those industry-standard connectors out of computers for
USB.
Parallel ports are still used as control interfaces to small CNC machines in preference to USB because they provide better real time
control. Old computers with parallel ports command a surprising premium because of this.
On 16/04/2022 11:41, nospam wrote:
In article <t3ds8l$1bvi$1@gioia.aioe.org>, alister
<alister.ware@ntlworld.com> wrote:
the reason is actually quite simple Apple are NOT primarily a technology >>> company, they are a fashion house. change for the sake of change every 6 >>> months & your customer base will buy everything again because they
simply
must have the latest model or die of embarrassment
that's nothing more than the usual bashing, and is demonstrably false.
Its demonstrably true.
As it is of all consumer product companies. Sales are everything, no
matter what the reason for them, and consumers are by their very nature
less sophisticated buyers, for whom brand image is usually far more
relevant than performance or total lifetime cost.
On a sunny day (Sat, 16 Apr 2022 07:36:23 GMT) it happened meff <email@example.com> wrote in <Xlu6K.430643$t2Bb.327174@fx98.iad>:
On 2022-04-16, Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:
I have a PCI par port card in one of my PCs
its the only real I/O on a PC.
Now with raspi we have GPIO, a BIG win!!!!
Apple is overpriced crap.
Nobody said anything about Apple being priced well :) I'm just here to
say the 3.5mm TRS jack is good to be dead. It was a bad connector and
it's well and good to be gone. I really don't care about Apple either
way. I'm an Android user myself and I'm _glad_ I don't have to bother
with 3.5mm jacks anymore.
We live in a world where making things redundant by introducing new standards to seLL new stuf seems to be the normal
I have many 3.5 mm earbuds and expensive Sennheiser headphone with 3.5 mm jacks
If Apple or anybody wants to exclude me from using it then they have already lost me as a buyer
(not that I would even consider Apple).
I have a Xiaomi Android phone for what was it? 140 Euro or so and it has a 3.5 mm head phone connector
plenty of apps available for it.
All my rapis have 3.5 mm jacks up to and including the Pi4 8 GB.
I have USB audio sticks for mike in and audio out for it too with 3.5 mm Jack That brings me to all those mikes...
All my rapis have 3.5 mm jacks up to and including the Pi4 8 GB.
What is a "rapi"
On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 08:50:58 -0000 (UTC), A. Dumas wrote:
alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> wrote:
the reason is actually quite simple Apple are NOT primarily a
technology company, they are a fashion house. change for the sake of
change every 6 months & your customer base will buy everything again
because they simply must have the latest model or die of embarrassment
This is a gross generalisation which might be true for a lot of people
and works well for Apple but a generalisation nonetheless. I am an old
unix/linux user who switched from Windows to Apple around 2008 because
as a developer (formerly web now mostly C) it "just" works. I don't need
gamer graphics but I do appreciate not running system updates for a
whole day after a week of not using a computer. And yes, I like the
aesthetics of both the hardware and (mostly) the software. Linux doesn't
work for me as a day to day desktop. I like tinkering as a hobby but I
don't want to be a busy system administrator for my own system.
I only recently switched from Android to iPhone and yes I miss the
headphone jack but I got a €5 adapter. It kinda sucks but modern (high
end)
Android phones also often don't have it anymore.
This much is true, unlike most Fashion houses Apple do make high Quality products that work well, its not the product I dislike it is the Corporate mentality & ethos of the company.
Alan wrote:
They did it because a deep jack like that makes for a mechanism for damaging the phone if it gets levered.
No quite the oppsite. Given a certain torque (determined by the
outside), the forces damaging stuff inside are smaller the longer the
lever is and vice versa.
They did it because a deep jack like that makes for a mechanism for
damaging the phone if it gets levered.
alister wrote:
the reason is actually quite simple Apple are NOT primarily a
technology company, they are a fashion house. change for the sake of
change every 6 months & your customer base will buy everything again
because they simply must have the latest model or die of embarrassment
Yup.
You understand the market dynamics well.
Marketing is why Apple products get worse, faster & more expensive over
time, while other electronics (like the raspi) get better, faster &
cheaper.
Apple removes functionality, and then tells them it's "courageous" to do
so.
*And they believe it!*
Apple secretly throttles CPUs and then says they have a special battery chemistry that only Apple uses and it's only used in certain iPhones.
*And they believe it!*
Apple has never shipped the correct 20W charger in any iPhone box when
Apple
tells its customers that they have too many (old decrepit) chargers
already.
*And they believe it!*
You can't make those ungodly profits off of an intelligent customer base.
*You just can't*
he's correct. torquing it *will* damage the phone,
On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 17:55:05 -0400, nospam wrote:
In article <t3cjcj$1s9$2@gioia.aioe.org>, alister
<alister.ware@ntlworld.com> wrote:
Apple replaced one method of connecting headphones/earbuds with
another.
replaces a universal interface with a proprietary one that can only be
sourced from Apple of an Apple licensed supplier.
usb-c is also licensed, for the many android devices that do not have an
analog headphone jack anymore.
Yep it is not just apple, others have seen that it can generate an
additional revenue stream & have adopted the same strategy
meff wrote:
How is that a logical sensible assessment in your well-informed opinion?
I for one prefer not having a 3.5mm jack on my phone (and I don't on
my Android).
Thank you for approaching the answer in the manner in which it was
posed, as
the iKooks are saying that somehow the phone is damaged by the mere
presence
of that industry standard 3.5mm jack on the side.
I already talked about my problems with the connector in
another post.
I don't doubt that _every_ standard has its pros and cons.
Practically speaking, they add another failure mode to
the phone and increase its bulk.
Do they?
A lot of people believe in their own intuition more than they believe in facts, where that's how marketing works (it preys on your intuition
believing something that wasn't actually ever said - but it was implied).
Is there _any_ evidence that the vast majority of phones with the standard 3.5mm jack are more prone to failures not associated directly with the
jack?
And, given most Android phones nowadays are coming with huge batteries (greater than about 4.5 Amp hour capacities), is the "bulk" of the industry standard 3.5mm jack on that rather thick side really a design impediment?
I've had my 3.5mm connectors die on
me often and frequently, everything from one channel going dead to
gunk buildup causing attenuated audio.
With all due respect, that's not what I'm asking as any 3.5mm jack that
works for a time and then fails thereafter was still useful for that time.
Not having that jack made it *NOT* useful for the _entire_ time.
I'm a pretty outdoorsy person
so that doesn't help.
You don't know me, but my last phone got crushed while I was rappelling.
The single connector design of phones without
the 3.5mm sockets make them easy to clean and maintain.
Again, I get it that you're basing that on pure intuition, but bear in mind that I know quite a lot about engineering where intuition is often wrong.
Take the "intuition" that people have with high-test gasoline being used
for
racing engines, so they think it gives their Honda Civic more power
somehow.
Hell, they even think "high octane jet fuel" will be even better, right?
And yet it's not.
Intuition is almost always wrong because even the smartest of us owns the intuition that nature gives the monkeys who descended from the trees onto
the savanna. (I know a bit about quantum mechanics, for example, where _nothing_ is intuitive, and if you think it is, you don't understand it...
to paraphrase Richard Feynman.)
I completely understood what you are claiming, but I question these
intuits:
1. Something to fail
2. Increase in bulk
3. Easy to maintain
Personally, I don't find any of those intuitive thoughts persuasive in
light
of the _functionality_ of a phone with and without the standard 3.5mm jack.
However let's see if anyone else has an ideas why the iKooks seem to claim that a phone with the functionality is somehow _less_ functional than one that doesn't have it at all.
meff wrote:
Nobody said anything about Apple being priced well :) I'm just here to
say the 3.5mm TRS jack is good to be dead. It was a bad connector and
it's well and good to be gone. I really don't care about Apple either
way. I'm an Android user myself and I'm _glad_ I don't have to bother
with 3.5mm jacks anymore.
If I assume you're a well educated person with at least an average IQ, I
will also have to assume that your thinking is based on a modicum of logic.
With that assumption in mind, I must ask how is a phone any less functional if it happens to be most phones which have the industry standard 3.5mm
jack?
The Apple iKooks seem to claim any phone with the industry standard 3.5 mm jack is (somehow) less functional than a phone that doesn't have that jack.
How is that a logical sensible assessment in your well-informed opinion?
On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 08:36:37 +0100, Andy Burnelli wrote:
Jan Panteltje wrote:
I have a PCI par port card in one of my PCs its the only real I/O on a
PC.
Now with raspi we have GPIO, a BIG win!!!!
Apple is overpriced crap.
I agree, and, more to the point of an educated astute observation...
The commonality of the raspi with almost _all_ other common consumer
electronics is that every year the raspi (and most consumer electronics)
gets (a) better, (b) faster, and (c) cheaper over time.
It's only the immensely hugely marketed electronic items which don't get
(a) better, (b) faster, and (c) cheaper over time.
HINT #1: Apple spends the lowest of all of high tech in R&D, yet Apple's
marketing budget is likely the largest of all high tech (bar none).
HINT #2: Guess why Apple products (which every year lose more and more
functionality) get (a) worse, (b) faster, and (c) more expensive over
time?
the reason is actually quite simple Apple are NOT primarily a technology company, they are a fashion house. change for the sake of change every 6 months & your customer base will buy everything again because they simply must have the latest model or die of embarrassment
meff wrote:
On 2022-04-16, Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
The loss of functionality you advocate for is like Apple removing the
industry standard USB-A ports on Apple computers which negates the
use of a
simple USB thumb drive.
Oof I'm sorry you lost your parallel port. It must have stung when
they took those industry-standard connectors out of computers for
USB.
Why not compare a modern Tesla to the old magtape of the days of yore?
What ceases to be shocking is how powerful Apple propaganda is on the
weakest brains who obtain most of their self esteem from Apple ads.
It's interesting that you equate the commonly useful USB-A port with the no-longer-used parallel port which proves how much power Apple advertising has on your feeble brain.
Clearly you have no education and a low IQ since a standard part of any testing regimen is to see how people can discern similar with different.
Like Russian citizens, you have been fed the propaganda soup for so long
that you can't possibly comprehend that a floppy disk isn't the same thing
as a 3.5 jack in terms of modern commonly useful & oft-used functionality.
Jan Panteltje wrote:
I have a PCI par port card in one of my PCs
its the only real I/O on a PC.
Now with raspi we have GPIO, a BIG win!!!!
Apple is overpriced crap.
I agree, and, more to the point of an educated astute observation...
The commonality of the raspi with almost _all_ other common consumer electronics is that every year the raspi (and most consumer electronics)
gets (a) better, (b) faster, and (c) cheaper over time.
It's only the immensely hugely marketed electronic items which don't get
(a) better, (b) faster, and (c) cheaper over time.
HINT #1: Apple spends the lowest of all of high tech in R&D, yet Apple's marketing budget is likely the largest of all high tech (bar none).
On 4/15/2022 11:47 PM, Jan Panteltje wrote:
<snip>
I have a PCI par port card in one of my PCs
its the only real I/O on a PC.
Now with raspi we have GPIO, a BIG win!!!!
The parallel port is also super easy to use. Even in the early days you
could use the four control lines as inputs so it was bi-directional, 4
bits at a time, but as it evolved it became fully bi-directional with a direction control bit (which caused problems for some users who would inadvertently set the bit to input).
he's correct. torquing it *will* damage the phone,
Of course it does, no-one ever doubted that. The real question is, for a given external torque which kind of jack does the most and which the
least damage. And for that the argument against 3.5mm was reversed.
In article <t3f0i6$4jt$1@dont-email.me>, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
All my rapis have 3.5 mm jacks up to and including the Pi4 8 GB.
What is a "rapi"
raspberry pi, one of the two groups to which this is cross-posted, for reasons known only to 'arlen'.
note that the raspberry pi zero (all varieties) does *not* have a 3,5mm
jack.
What specific parts of the "mentality & ethos" do you findApple have very much an attitude of you will only use our product the way
objectionable?
we say you will use it.
example they refused a camera app for the ip into the store because the
user had repurposed one of the SOFT keys as a shutter button.
In article <t3e7am$7hi$1@dont-email.me>, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
the reason is actually quite simple Apple are NOT primarily a
technology company, they are a fashion house. change for the sake of
change every 6 months & your customer base will buy everything again
because they simply must have the latest model or die of
embarrassment
that's nothing more than the usual bashing, and is demonstrably
false.
Its demonstrably true.
it is not.
As it is of all consumer product companies. Sales are everything, no
matter what the reason for them, and consumers are by their very nature
less sophisticated buyers, for whom brand image is usually far more
relevant than performance or total lifetime cost.
except that people buy apple products because they do what people want
them to do, not because of any mythical brand image.
performance is as good or better than the competition and total lifetime
cost is less, often by quite a bit.
<https://bgr.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/galaxy-s21-ultra-vs-iphone-1 3-pro-geekench-5-benchmark.jpg> <https://bgr.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/pixel-5-vs-iphone-13-pro-gee kench-5-benchmark.jpg>
<https://www.computerworld.com/article/3131906/ibm-says-macs-are-even-ch eaper-to-run-than-it-thought.html>
IBM today told the record-setting seventh Jamf Nation User Conference
that it is saving even more money by deploying Macs across the company
than it thought: each Mac deployment saves the company up to $535 over
four years, in contrast to the $270 per Mac it claimed last year.
...
This is fully in line with experiences shared in 2015, when Previn
said just 5 percent of IBM¹s Mac users needed to call the help desk;
In contrast, an astonishing 40 percent of PC staff request tech
support help. At IBM last year just 25 staff supported 30,000 Macs.
On 2022-04-16 2:31 a.m., alister wrote:Apple have very much an attitude of you will only use our product the way
On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 08:50:58 -0000 (UTC), A. Dumas wrote:What specific parts of the "mentality & ethos" do you find
alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> wrote:
the reason is actually quite simple Apple are NOT primarily a
technology company, they are a fashion house. change for the sake of
change every 6 months & your customer base will buy everything again
because they simply must have the latest model or die of
embarrassment
This is a gross generalisation which might be true for a lot of people
and works well for Apple but a generalisation nonetheless. I am an old
unix/linux user who switched from Windows to Apple around 2008 because
as a developer (formerly web now mostly C) it "just" works. I don't
need gamer graphics but I do appreciate not running system updates for
a whole day after a week of not using a computer. And yes, I like the
aesthetics of both the hardware and (mostly) the software. Linux
doesn't work for me as a day to day desktop. I like tinkering as a
hobby but I don't want to be a busy system administrator for my own
system.
I only recently switched from Android to iPhone and yes I miss the
headphone jack but I got a €5 adapter. It kinda sucks but modern (high >>> end)
Android phones also often don't have it anymore.
This much is true, unlike most Fashion houses Apple do make high
Quality products that work well, its not the product I dislike it is
the Corporate mentality & ethos of the company.
objectionable?
why do you keep Posting under 2 identities? It is quite clear who you actually are
On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 10:02:27 -0400, nospam wrote:
In article <t3e7am$7hi$1@dont-email.me>, The Natural Philosopher
<tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
the reason is actually quite simple Apple are NOT primarily a
technology company, they are a fashion house. change for the sake of >>>>> change every 6 months & your customer base will buy everything again >>>>> because they simply must have the latest model or die of
embarrassment
that's nothing more than the usual bashing, and is demonstrably
false.
Its demonstrably true.
it is not.
As it is of all consumer product companies. Sales are everything, no
matter what the reason for them, and consumers are by their very nature
less sophisticated buyers, for whom brand image is usually far more
relevant than performance or total lifetime cost.
except that people buy apple products because they do what people want
them to do, not because of any mythical brand image.
performance is as good or better than the competition and total lifetime
cost is less, often by quite a bit.
<https://bgr.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/galaxy-s21-ultra-vs-iphone-1
3-pro-geekench-5-benchmark.jpg>
<https://bgr.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/pixel-5-vs-iphone-13-pro-gee
kench-5-benchmark.jpg>
<https://www.computerworld.com/article/3131906/ibm-says-macs-are-even-ch
eaper-to-run-than-it-thought.html>
IBM today told the record-setting seventh Jamf Nation User Conference
that it is saving even more money by deploying Macs across the company
than it thought: each Mac deployment saves the company up to $535 over
four years, in contrast to the $270 per Mac it claimed last year.
...
This is fully in line with experiences shared in 2015, when Previn
said just 5 percent of IBM¹s Mac users needed to call the help desk;
In contrast, an astonishing 40 percent of PC staff request tech
support help. At IBM last year just 25 staff supported 30,000 Macs.
why do you keep Posting under 2 identities? It is quite clear who you actually are
In article <t3f5fc$1idl$2@gioia.aioe.org>, alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> wrote:
why do you keep Posting under 2 identities? It is quite clear who you
actually are
it's not as clear as you think since i only post under one identity.
'arlen' is the one who switches nyms more often than the wind changes.
On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 15:36:06 -0400, nospam wrote:
In article <t3f5fc$1idl$2@gioia.aioe.org>, alister
<alister.ware@ntlworld.com> wrote:
why do you keep Posting under 2 identities? It is quite clear who you
actually are
it's not as clear as you think since i only post under one identity.
'arlen' is the one who switches nyms more often than the wind changes.
strange, i mentioned no names but you seem to think you know who i mean Guilty conscience?
On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 11:18:34 -0700, Alan wrote:
On 2022-04-16 2:31 a.m., alister wrote:Apple have very much an attitude of you will only use our product the way
On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 08:50:58 -0000 (UTC), A. Dumas wrote:What specific parts of the "mentality & ethos" do you find
alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> wrote:
the reason is actually quite simple Apple are NOT primarily a
technology company, they are a fashion house. change for the sake of >>>>> change every 6 months & your customer base will buy everything again >>>>> because they simply must have the latest model or die of
embarrassment
This is a gross generalisation which might be true for a lot of people >>>> and works well for Apple but a generalisation nonetheless. I am an old >>>> unix/linux user who switched from Windows to Apple around 2008 because >>>> as a developer (formerly web now mostly C) it "just" works. I don't
need gamer graphics but I do appreciate not running system updates for >>>> a whole day after a week of not using a computer. And yes, I like the
aesthetics of both the hardware and (mostly) the software. Linux
doesn't work for me as a day to day desktop. I like tinkering as a
hobby but I don't want to be a busy system administrator for my own
system.
I only recently switched from Android to iPhone and yes I miss the
headphone jack but I got a €5 adapter. It kinda sucks but modern (high >>>> end)
Android phones also often don't have it anymore.
This much is true, unlike most Fashion houses Apple do make high
Quality products that work well, its not the product I dislike it is
the Corporate mentality & ethos of the company.
objectionable?
we say you will use it.
example they refused a camera app for the ip into the store because the
user had repurposed one of the SOFT keys as a shutter button.
Apples reasoning - whilst documented as a soft button our apps use that
for a specific function & it is what users expect.
I MIGHT have accepted this except for the fact that in the next upgrade
they decided to change the operation of that button themselves!
Parallel ports are still used as control interfaces to small CNC machines in preference to USB because they provide better real time
control. Old computers with parallel ports command a surprising premium because of this.
why do you keep Posting under 2 identities? It is quite clear who you
actually are
it's not as clear as you think since i only post under one identity.
'arlen' is the one who switches nyms more often than the wind changes.
strange, i mentioned no names but you seem to think you know who i mean Guilty conscience?
Which brings me back to my original point, as a consumer connector TRS sockets are just bad. Even as an industrial connector TRS sockets are
kinda bad. In certain specialized situations TRS sockets make sense
but as a consumer connector I'm glad they're mostly done and over.
Yep it is not just apple, others have seen that it can generate an
additional revenue stream & have adopted the same strategy
I only recently switched from Android to iPhone and yes I miss the
headphone jack but I got a 5 adapter. It kinda sucks but modern (high end) Android phones also often don't have it anymore.
Likewise there are cases where the TRS 3.5mm connector is IMO a better
choice than a USB or Bluetooth based connector.
This much is true, unlike most Fashion houses Apple do make high Quality products that work well, its not the product I dislike it is the Corporate mentality & ethos of the company.
the reason is actually quite simple Apple are NOT primarily a technology
company, they are a fashion house. change for the sake of change every 6
months & your customer base will buy everything again because they simply
must have the latest model or die of embarrassment
that's nothing more than the usual bashing, and is demonstrably false.
however, the claim that apple is a fashion brand is flat out false.
you must be new.
The parallel port is also super easy to use.
On 2022-04-16, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
Parallel ports are still used as control interfaces to small CNC
machines in preference to USB because they provide better real time
control. Old computers with parallel ports command a surprising premium
because of this.
Yeah I'm fully aware that there are situations that parallel ports
make more sense, and latency is a big one. Same with Serial ports as
there's no bring-up or negotiation process required along the port
(and if you can drive the serial port faster than the parallel port,
then it could potentially have higher throughput.) But not for most
consumer usecases.
Alan wrote:
They did it because a deep jack like that makes for a mechanism for
damaging the phone if it gets levered.
No quite the oppsite. Given a certain torque (determined by the
outside), the forces damaging stuff inside are smaller the longer the
lever is and vice versa.
The 3.5mm connector was used for a wide variety of devices that plugged
into a phone, devices that needed only a low-speed interface with
minimal power. Since it was on every phone, and there were no royalties associated with it, it became the de facto "universal interface" for
both iPhones and Android phones.
Some of the devices were:
High quality microphones when doing video recording
Light meters
IR Blasters
Credit card readers (Square originally used the headphone jack)
Amplified high-quality speakers
Breathalyzer
Laser Pointer
Level
Thermometer
FM Radio Antenna (for Android)
And of course the 3.5mm headphone jack provides better quality audio
than Bluetooth,
though the Lightning to 3.5mm and USB to 3.5mm dongles
are just as good, it's just that the D/A and A/D are duplicated in the dongle. It's just an annoyance to have to buy and carry along one extra
item.
They did it because a deep jack like that makes for a mechanism for
damaging the phone if it gets levered.
No quite the oppsite. Given a certain torque (determined by the
outside), the forces damaging stuff inside are smaller the longer the
lever is and vice versa.
Wow, I've never seen the "torque" excuse before for eliminating the
headphone jack!
By that logic, they should have gotten rid of the Lightning port since
it's much more prone to damage. Very creative!
The reality is that a metal 3.5mm plug, inside the phone, is much less subject to damage than the non-conductive PC board substrate that is
part of the Lightning connector.
Of course a USB-C connector, both sides of which have a steel shell, is
also less subject to damage than a Lightning connector.
Hopefully the
move to USB-C, which has already occurred with the iPad, will occur with
the iPhone by the iPhone 15. If Apple really wants to distinguish the
iPhone Pro versus non Pro models then they could use USB-C on the Pro
and Lightning on the non-Pro, like they initially did with the iPad.
On 4/16/2022 1:40 PM, meff wrote:
On 2022-04-16, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
Parallel ports are still used as control interfaces to small CNC >>> machines in preference to USB because they provide better real time
control. Old computers with parallel ports command a surprising premium
because of this.
Yeah I'm fully aware that there are situations that parallel ports
make more sense, and latency is a big one. Same with Serial ports as
there's no bring-up or negotiation process required along the port
(and if you can drive the serial port faster than the parallel port,
then it could potentially have higher throughput.) But not for most
consumer usecases.
It's become harder to directly read from, and write to, the parallel
port when using Windows versions beginning with Windows 7, as well as
more difficult because the I/O addresses are no longer the legacy ISA >parallel port addresses. Of course you can still use MS-DOS or FreeDOS
if you're doing embedded systems control through the parallel port.
Not sure how this thread went from wired keyboards to 3.5mm audio jacks
(when did 1/8" audio jacks become 3.5mm jacks?).
In article <t3fg8q$mum$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
The 3.5mm connector was used for a wide variety of devices that plugged
into a phone, devices that needed only a low-speed interface with
minimal power. Since it was on every phone, and there were no royalties
associated with it, it became the de facto "universal interface" for
both iPhones and Android phones.
Some of the devices were:
High quality microphones when doing video recording
Light meters
IR Blasters
Credit card readers (Square originally used the headphone jack)
Amplified high-quality speakers
Breathalyzer
Laser Pointer
Level
Thermometer
FM Radio Antenna (for Android)
all of those can be done more easily, more reliably and with more >functionality by using lightning or usb-c, and in some cases,
bluetooth.
And of course the 3.5mm headphone jack provides better quality audio
than Bluetooth,
it does not.
the limiting factor is the transducer itself, not the connection method.
though the Lightning to 3.5mm and USB to 3.5mm dongles
are just as good, it's just that the D/A and A/D are duplicated in the
dongle. It's just an annoyance to have to buy and carry along one extra
item.
then get usb-c or lightning headphones, such as the ones that were
included in the box of the iphone you supposedly have.
On 2022-04-16 3:55 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 16/04/2022 11:41, nospam wrote:
In article <t3ds8l$1bvi$1@gioia.aioe.org>, alister
<alister.ware@ntlworld.com> wrote:
the reason is actually quite simple Apple are NOT primarily a
technology
company, they are a fashion house. change for the sake of change
every 6
months & your customer base will buy everything again because they
simply
must have the latest model or die of embarrassment
that's nothing more than the usual bashing, and is demonstrably false.
Its demonstrably true.
As it is of all consumer product companies. Sales are everything, no
matter what the reason for them, and consumers are by their very
nature less sophisticated buyers, for whom brand image is usually far
more relevant than performance or total lifetime cost.
Is that all consumers...
...except you?
You're clever enough to see through it, right?
On 2022-04-16 12:46 a.m., alister wrote:
On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 08:36:37 +0100, Andy Burnelli wrote:
Jan Panteltje wrote:
I have a PCI par port card in one of my PCs its the only real I/O on a >>>> PC.
Now with raspi we have GPIO, a BIG win!!!!
Apple is overpriced crap.
I agree, and, more to the point of an educated astute observation...
The commonality of the raspi with almost _all_ other common consumer
electronics is that every year the raspi (and most consumer electronics) >>> gets (a) better, (b) faster, and (c) cheaper over time.
It's only the immensely hugely marketed electronic items which don't get >>> (a) better, (b) faster, and (c) cheaper over time.
HINT #1: Apple spends the lowest of all of high tech in R&D, yet Apple's >>> marketing budget is likely the largest of all high tech (bar none).
HINT #2: Guess why Apple products (which every year lose more and more
functionality) get (a) worse, (b) faster, and (c) more expensive over
time?
the reason is actually quite simple Apple are NOT primarily a technology
company, they are a fashion house. change for the sake of change every 6
months & your customer base will buy everything again because they simply
must have the latest model or die of embarrassment
What utterly, patent bullshit.
They are clearly a technology company...
...and a very successful one.
Apple have very much an attitude of you will only use our product the way
we say you will use it.
On 2022-04-16 12:28 p.m., alister wrote:No
On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 11:18:34 -0700, Alan wrote:
On 2022-04-16 2:31 a.m., alister wrote:Apple have very much an attitude of you will only use our product the
On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 08:50:58 -0000 (UTC), A. Dumas wrote:What specific parts of the "mentality & ethos" do you find
alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> wrote:
the reason is actually quite simple Apple are NOT primarily a
technology company, they are a fashion house. change for the sake
of change every 6 months & your customer base will buy everything
again because they simply must have the latest model or die of
embarrassment
This is a gross generalisation which might be true for a lot of
people and works well for Apple but a generalisation nonetheless. I
am an old unix/linux user who switched from Windows to Apple around
2008 because as a developer (formerly web now mostly C) it "just"
works. I don't need gamer graphics but I do appreciate not running
system updates for a whole day after a week of not using a computer. >>>>> And yes, I like the aesthetics of both the hardware and (mostly) the >>>>> software. Linux doesn't work for me as a day to day desktop. I like
tinkering as a hobby but I don't want to be a busy system
administrator for my own system.
I only recently switched from Android to iPhone and yes I miss the
headphone jack but I got a €5 adapter. It kinda sucks but modern
(high end)
Android phones also often don't have it anymore.
This much is true, unlike most Fashion houses Apple do make high
Quality products that work well, its not the product I dislike it is
the Corporate mentality & ethos of the company.
objectionable?
way we say you will use it.
So you mean like literally thousands of other companies?
example they refused a camera app for the ip into the store because the
user had repurposed one of the SOFT keys as a shutter button.
Apples reasoning - whilst documented as a soft button our apps use that
for a specific function & it is what users expect.
I MIGHT have accepted this except for the fact that in the next upgrade
they decided to change the operation of that button themselves!
Cite please!
And of course the 3.5mm headphone jack provides better quality audio
than Bluetooth,
it does not.
the limiting factor is the transducer itself, not the connection method.
That is not correct.
In my experience wireless links (bluetooth or whatever) are not very reliable.
Same for wireless keyboards, sometimes mine is obstructed by stuff on the table
that I then have to move,
A direct connection will always be better no matter the RF protocol.
Also I do not like bluetooth headsets I want no RF next to my head for long times,
The small earbuds normally have a 90 degrees angled connector and do not have that 'lever'
sort of thing that can break the connector.
And the waterproof argument is a bit far fetched listen with phone upside down in the shower?
Dive with it listening underwater to the earplugs?
What specific parts of the "mentality & ethos" do you findApple have very much an attitude of you will only use our product the
objectionable?
way we say you will use it.
So you mean like literally thousands of other companies?No
Must other companies don't give a f**k what you do with a product once you have purchased it (unless you try to claim under warranty for damage you
have caused of course)
And only on the protocols they sell themselves.
No apple based brower supports webm for example
In article <t3gcug$ghv$1@dont-email.me>, Jan Panteltje ><pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:
And of course the 3.5mm headphone jack provides better quality audio
than Bluetooth,
it does not.
the limiting factor is the transducer itself, not the connection method.
That is not correct.
it is correct.
In my experience wireless links (bluetooth or whatever) are not very reliable.
Same for wireless keyboards, sometimes mine is obstructed by stuff on the
table
that I then have to move,
A direct connection will always be better no matter the RF protocol.
i don't know what bluetooth devices you've used, but they don't sound
like very good ones.
what you describe is definitely not representative of bluetooth, which
is *extremely* reliable.
apple doesn't care what you do with a product once it's been purchased.
In article <t3go74$sa$1@gioia.aioe.org>, alister
<alister.ware@ntlworld.com> wrote:
NoWhat specific parts of the "mentality & ethos" do you findApple have very much an attitude of you will only use our product the
objectionable?
way we say you will use it.
So you mean like literally thousands of other companies?
Must other companies don't give a f**k what you do with a product once you >> have purchased it (unless you try to claim under warranty for damage you
have caused of course)
apple doesn't care what you do with a product once it's been purchased.
also, they will sometimes repair customer damage for free. it's not
always going to happen, but it's certainly a possibility.
i know someone who bought an iphone and dropped it shortly after,
causing the display to crack. he went to the apple store and told them
what happened, that he was a clumsy oaf and it was entirely his fault, >wanting to know how much it would cost to fix it. they said 'no
charge'.
Steve Jobs went on (later) about Apple's superior processors used
for nuclear research testing.
And of course the 3.5mm headphone jack provides better quality audio
than Bluetooth,
it does not.
the limiting factor is the transducer itself, not the connection method.
That is not correct.
In my experience wireless links (bluetooth or whatever) are not very reliable.
Same for wireless keyboards, sometimes mine is obstructed by stuff on the table
that I then have to move,
A direct connection will always be better no matter the RF protocol.
Also I do not like bluetooth headsets I want no RF next to my head for long times,
though the Lightning to 3.5mm and USB to 3.5mm dongles
are just as good, it's just that the D/A and A/D are duplicated in the
dongle. It's just an annoyance to have to buy and carry along one extra
item.
then get usb-c or lightning headphones, such as the ones that were
included in the box of the iphone you supposedly have.
The small earbuds normally have a 90 degrees angled connector and do not have that 'lever'
sort of thing that can break the connector.
And the waterproof argument is a bit far fetched listen with phone upside down in the shower?
Dive with it listening underwater to the earplugs?
I have heard others do what sounded like a 'break into' my bluetooth link to my TV.
Also the whole pairing is a nuisance if you have more than one BT transmitter and receiver like I do.
Then there is the general security issue, not only for BT but for all wireless equipment, disaster.
Without any doubt the 68000 was a much better processor than the
comparable 80386. From then on Intel took off and left Motorola behind
(the 68030, 69040 never caught on commercially).
But up to than IBM sold
far inferior products through marketing clout.
apple doesn't care what you do with a product once it's been purchased.
The sort of wallet gardening seen in Apple devices clearly proves they have an
idea of how their products are to be used,
and they clearly want to bill you
if you want to step off the safe area.
For example, you can only use Apps aproved by Apple out of the box.
If I want
to use a program I wrote, I am expected to buy an subscription as an App developer and load my program into the phone using their channels, which is utterly bonkers.
There are programs known to work on iOS which don't have an official version because the developers won't go through the hassle and expense required.
Apple was fake from the beginning, buying the name 'Apple' from the Beatles
Steve Jobs went on (later) about Apple's superior processors used for nuclear research testing.
I demonstrated to someone that a x86 was faster... they went Intel
Jobs then also changed to Intel
He was a very good salesman.
But if you take the trouble to google a bit, then you will see, that even recently, Apple does a lot of dirty tricks
What makes no difference is whether the A/D and D/A for wired headphones
are inside the phone or inside the Lightning or USB-C dongle.
There is
no difference in sound quality (unless you've purchased a junky
after-market dongle).
But there are multiple differences in sound quality between wired
headphones and Bluetooth headphones, depending on the phone and the headphones.
When using Bluetooth headphones and watching video, there is often a perceptible delay between the video and the audio, depending on both the phone and the headphones. For music, a few milliseconds of delay doesn't matter but when watching videos it does.
On Android devices, you can use the higher quality aptX HD or aptX
Adaptive codecs to mostly solve this issue.
On 16/04/2022 20:28, alister wrote:
Apple have very much an attitude of you will only use our product the way
we say you will use it.
And only on the protocols they sell themselves.
No apple based brower supports webm for example
On 16/04/2022 18:53, Alan wrote:
On 2022-04-16 3:55 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:Yes. I was lucky enough to spend most of my life selling and making
On 16/04/2022 11:41, nospam wrote:
In article <t3ds8l$1bvi$1@gioia.aioe.org>, alister
<alister.ware@ntlworld.com> wrote:
the reason is actually quite simple Apple are NOT primarily a
technology
company, they are a fashion house. change for the sake of change
every 6
months & your customer base will buy everything again because they
simply
must have the latest model or die of embarrassment
that's nothing more than the usual bashing, and is demonstrably false.
Its demonstrably true.
As it is of all consumer product companies. Sales are everything, no
matter what the reason for them, and consumers are by their very
nature less sophisticated buyers, for whom brand image is usually far
more relevant than performance or total lifetime cost.
Is that all consumers...
...except you?
You're clever enough to see through it, right?
products for professional and industrial users.
I learnt to see the difference.
On 16/04/2022 19:31, Alan wrote:
On 2022-04-16 12:46 a.m., alister wrote:
On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 08:36:37 +0100, Andy Burnelli wrote:
Jan Panteltje wrote:
I have a PCI par port card in one of my PCs its the only real I/O on a >>>>> PC.
Now with raspi we have GPIO, a BIG win!!!!
Apple is overpriced crap.
I agree, and, more to the point of an educated astute observation...
The commonality of the raspi with almost _all_ other common consumer
electronics is that every year the raspi (and most consumer
electronics)
gets (a) better, (b) faster, and (c) cheaper over time.
It's only the immensely hugely marketed electronic items which don't
get
(a) better, (b) faster, and (c) cheaper over time.
HINT #1: Apple spends the lowest of all of high tech in R&D, yet
Apple's
marketing budget is likely the largest of all high tech (bar none).
HINT #2: Guess why Apple products (which every year lose more and more >>>> functionality) get (a) worse, (b) faster, and (c) more expensive over
time?
the reason is actually quite simple Apple are NOT primarily a technology >>> company, they are a fashion house. change for the sake of change every 6 >>> months & your customer base will buy everything again because they
simply
must have the latest model or die of embarrassment
What utterly, patent bullshit.
They are clearly a technology company...
...and a very successful one.
Who told you that, then?
On a sunny day (Sun, 17 Apr 2022 06:53:53 -0400) it happened nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in <170420220653534903%nospam@nospam.invalid>:
In article <t3go74$sa$1@gioia.aioe.org>, alister
<alister.ware@ntlworld.com> wrote:
NoWhat specific parts of the "mentality & ethos" do you findApple have very much an attitude of you will only use our product the >>>>> way we say you will use it.
objectionable?
So you mean like literally thousands of other companies?
Must other companies don't give a f**k what you do with a product once you >>> have purchased it (unless you try to claim under warranty for damage you >>> have caused of course)
apple doesn't care what you do with a product once it's been purchased.
also, they will sometimes repair customer damage for free. it's not
always going to happen, but it's certainly a possibility.
i know someone who bought an iphone and dropped it shortly after,
causing the display to crack. he went to the apple store and told them
what happened, that he was a clumsy oaf and it was entirely his fault,
wanting to know how much it would cost to fix it. they said 'no
charge'.
Apple was fake from the beginning, buying the name 'Apple' from the Beatles
Steve Jobs went on (later) about Apple's superior processors used for nuclear research testing.
I demonstrated to someone that a x86 was faster... they went Intel
Jobs then also changed to Intel
He was a very good salesman.
But if you take the trouble to google a bit, then you will see, that even recently, Apple does a lot of dirty tricks
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/11/apple-settles-with-states-for-113m-over-iphone-battery-throttling/
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2022/03/apple-fixes-ios-15-4-battery-drain-issue-with-software-update/?comments=1
read the comments
nospam wrote:
the reason is actually quite simple Apple are NOT primarily a
technology company, they are a fashion house. change for the sake of
change every 6 months & your customer base will buy everything again
because they simply must have the latest model or die of embarrassment
that's nothing more than the usual bashing, and is demonstrably false.
While you iKooks defend everything Apple does to the death, he's right.
The facts show Apple is a MARKETING powerhouse. Not an R&D powerhouse.
*Does it surprise you Apple spends less in R&D than anyone in high tech?* <https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/STrAkx09VYk/m/4Qr_Iuq5AwAJ>
alister wrote:
Yep it is not just apple, others have seen that it can generate an
additional revenue stream & have adopted the same strategy
What the iTrolls (Alan Baker) and iKooks (nospam) won't tell you is that Apple is perhaps the finest marketing organization on the planet.
The iTrolls (Alan) & iKooks (nospam) blindly defend everything Apple does.
To the death.
Apple spends almost nothing in R&D compared to similarly sized companies in high tech, but boy oh boy does Apple outspend everyone else on marketing.
Hence any company would _love_ to be able to follow in Apple's
footsteps, as you astutely noted.
To your point, notice recent estimates showed Apple made tens of
billions of
dollars by removing the accessories from the iPhone 12 & iPhone 13 boxes.
<https://www.gizmochina.com/2022/03/14/apple-reportedly-6-billion-removing-charger-earpods-box/>
<https://www.phonearena.com/news/apple-saved-billions-removing-accessories-from-boxes_id139005>
<https://techstory.in/apple-reportedly-saved-in-billions-with-removing-chargers-earpods-from-box/>
<https://screenrant.com/apple-saved-billions-removing-chargers-boxes/>
etc.
Who wouldn't want a piece of that pie which Apple pioneered for them?
there is no difference in sound quality. the limiting factor are the transducers in the headphones, not the method it's connected.
there is no difference in sound quality. the limiting factor are the transducers in the headphones, not the method it's connected.
There's an interesting point to raise here. Cheap bluetooth headphones
are going to be worse than cheap wired headphones. Many cheap
Bluetooth implementations have terrible jitter on the transceiver and
offer no way to compensate for transmission latency. These days as
Bluetooth stacks mature and there's simple and cheap IP to
"copy-paste" into designs, this is less of an issue, but for a good
while the bottom of the market in wired headphones was a lot better
than the bottom of the market in bluetooth headphones because of
jitter and dropped packets.
I realize this is a pedantic comparison as we're basically comparing
crap with crap. Unfortunately anyone who has been cursed with cheap
bluetooth headphones in the past may think that issues with cheap
bluetooth headphones plague more expensive/more recent bluetooth
headphone designs which is where this sentiment comes from.
I had a Bluetooth to magnetic casette adapter in a car years ago and
any time the car got too hot the thing would stutter like no
tomorrow. But I was young, I didn't have much money, and I bought the cheapest thing I could find.
all companies have ideas on how their products are to be used, however,
that doesn't prohibit anyone from doing something else.
and they clearly want to bill you
if you want to step off the safe area.
no they don't.
For example, you can only use Apps aproved by Apple out of the box.
same for android and windows 10s.
microsoft originally wanted to charge money to 'upgrade' to windows 10
from 10s.
If I want
to use a program I wrote, I am expected to buy an subscription as an App developer and load my program into the phone using their channels, which i utterly bonkers.
that is absolutely false.
anyone can write their own apps and use them on their own devices.
apple even stated that would *always* be the case.
On 2022-04-17 1:38 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 16/04/2022 19:31, Alan wrote:
On 2022-04-16 12:46 a.m., alister wrote:
On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 08:36:37 +0100, Andy Burnelli wrote:
Jan Panteltje wrote:
I have a PCI par port card in one of my PCs its the only real I/O
on a
PC.
Now with raspi we have GPIO, a BIG win!!!!
Apple is overpriced crap.
I agree, and, more to the point of an educated astute observation... >>>>>
The commonality of the raspi with almost _all_ other common consumer >>>>> electronics is that every year the raspi (and most consumer
electronics)
gets (a) better, (b) faster, and (c) cheaper over time.
It's only the immensely hugely marketed electronic items which
don't get
(a) better, (b) faster, and (c) cheaper over time.
HINT #1: Apple spends the lowest of all of high tech in R&D, yet
Apple's
marketing budget is likely the largest of all high tech (bar none).
HINT #2: Guess why Apple products (which every year lose more and more >>>>> functionality) get (a) worse, (b) faster, and (c) more expensive over >>>>> time?
the reason is actually quite simple Apple are NOT primarily a
technology
company, they are a fashion house. change for the sake of change
every 6
months & your customer base will buy everything again because they
simply
must have the latest model or die of embarrassment
What utterly, patent bullshit.
They are clearly a technology company...
...and a very successful one.
Who told you that, then?
I learned it from years and years of experience.
On 2022-04-17 1:41 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 16/04/2022 20:28, alister wrote:
Apple have very much an attitude of you will only use our product the
way
we say you will use it.
And only on the protocols they sell themselves.
No apple based brower supports webm for example
Wow.
Utterly wrong.
Using Safari on my Mac, went here:
<https://www.webmfiles.org/demo-files/>
'Just try it below – if you see the video, your browser is capable of playing WebM Videos.'
The video played fine.
On 2022-04-17 1:41 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 16/04/2022 20:28, alister wrote:
Apple have very much an attitude of you will only use our product the
way
we say you will use it.
And only on the protocols they sell themselves.
No apple based brower supports webm for example
Wow.
Utterly wrong.
Using Safari on my Mac, went here:
<https://www.webmfiles.org/demo-files/>
'Just try it below – if you see the video, your browser is capable of playing WebM Videos.'
The video played fine.
On 17/04/2022 21:20, Alan wrote:
On 2022-04-17 1:41 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:I see that it only took them 11 year to add Vorbis/VP8 and it became available at the end of last year.
On 16/04/2022 20:28, alister wrote:
Apple have very much an attitude of you will only use our product
the way
we say you will use it.
And only on the protocols they sell themselves.
No apple based brower supports webm for example
Wow.
Utterly wrong.
Using Safari on my Mac, went here:
<https://www.webmfiles.org/demo-files/>
'Just try it below – if you see the video, your browser is capable of
playing WebM Videos.'
The video played fine.
I see that it only took them 11 year to add Vorbis/VP8 and it became available at the end of last year.
"Currently available as an option in the Experimental WebKit Features
section of Safari's advanced settings, WebM Web Audio and the related
WebM MSE parser are two parts of the wider WebM audiovisual media file
format developed by Google.
An open-source initiative, WebM presents a royalty-free alternative to
common web video streaming technology and serves as a container for the
VP8 and VP9 video codecs. As it relates to Safari, WebM Web Audio
provides support for the Vorbis and Opus audio codecs.
Code uncovered by 9to5Mac reveals the WebM audio codec should be enabled
by default going forward, suggesting that Apple will officially adopt
the standard when iOS 15 sees release.
Apple added support for the WebM video codec on Mac when a second macOS
Big Sur 11.3 beta was issued in February. The video portion of WebM has
yet to see implementation on iOS, but that could soon change with the adoption of WebM's audio assets.
WebM dates back to 2010, but Apple has been reluctant to bake the format
into its flagship operating systems. Late co-founder Steve Jobs once
called the format "a mess" that "wasn't ready for prime time."
As AppleInsider noted when WebM hit macOS, Apple might be angling to
support high-resolution playback from certain streaming services like YouTube, which rely on VP9 to stream 4K content. The validation of WebM
Web Audio is a step in that direction.
Apple is expected to launch iOS 15 this fall alongside a slate of new
iPhone and Apple Watch models.
Read on AppleInsider"
https://forums.appleinsider.com/discussion/223312/apple-adds-webm-web-audio-support-to-safari-in-latest-ios-15-beta
So you can only view webm video using the uber latest experimental
version of IOS/MacOS
No apple based brower supports webm for example
Wow.
Utterly wrong.
Using Safari on my Mac, went here:
<https://www.webmfiles.org/demo-files/>
'Just try it below if you see the video, your browser is capable of playing WebM Videos.'
The video played fine.
no chance with vorbis/VP8
Not that it matters, because Android is a depictable platform in any case,
but
on an Android phone you can hit a configuration switch and install extraofficial apk's to your heart's content.
Meanwhile, you need an Apple account to install your own stuff, and the free tier is only suitable for testing and does not help you install any program you want to run regularly.
Unless you are fine reinstalling the same piece of
software everytime the development center decides your "experimental" install is expired.
On 17/04/2022 21:20, Alan wrote:
On 2022-04-17 1:41 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:I see that it only took them 11 year to add Vorbis/VP8 and it became available at the end of last year.
On 16/04/2022 20:28, alister wrote:
Apple have very much an attitude of you will only use our product
the way
we say you will use it.
And only on the protocols they sell themselves.
No apple based brower supports webm for example
Wow.
Utterly wrong.
Using Safari on my Mac, went here:
<https://www.webmfiles.org/demo-files/>
'Just try it below – if you see the video, your browser is capable of
playing WebM Videos.'
The video played fine.
On 18/04/2022 10:42, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 17/04/2022 21:20, Alan wrote:FYI
On 2022-04-17 1:41 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:I see that it only took them 11 year to add Vorbis/VP8 and it became
On 16/04/2022 20:28, alister wrote:
Apple have very much an attitude of you will only use our product
the way
we say you will use it.
And only on the protocols they sell themselves.
No apple based brower supports webm for example
Wow.
Utterly wrong.
Using Safari on my Mac, went here:
<https://www.webmfiles.org/demo-files/>
'Just try it below – if you see the video, your browser is capable of
playing WebM Videos.'
available at the end of last year.
The video played fine.
"Currently available as an option in the Experimental WebKit Features
section of Safari's advanced settings, WebM Web Audio and the related
WebM MSE parser are two parts of the wider WebM audiovisual media file
format developed by Google.
An open-source initiative, WebM presents a royalty-free alternative to
common web video streaming technology and serves as a container for the
VP8 and VP9 video codecs. As it relates to Safari, WebM Web Audio
provides support for the Vorbis and Opus audio codecs.
Code uncovered by 9to5Mac reveals the WebM audio codec should be enabled
by default going forward, suggesting that Apple will officially adopt
the standard when iOS 15 sees release.
Apple added support for the WebM video codec on Mac when a second macOS
Big Sur 11.3 beta was issued in February. The video portion of WebM has
yet to see implementation on iOS, but that could soon change with the adoption of WebM's audio assets.
WebM dates back to 2010, but Apple has been reluctant to bake the format
into its flagship operating systems. Late co-founder Steve Jobs once
called the format "a mess" that "wasn't ready for prime time."
As AppleInsider noted when WebM hit macOS, Apple might be angling to
support high-resolution playback from certain streaming services like YouTube, which rely on VP9 to stream 4K content. The validation of WebM
Web Audio is a step in that direction.
Apple is expected to launch iOS 15 this fall alongside a slate of new
iPhone and Apple Watch models.
Read on AppleInsider"
https://forums.appleinsider.com/discussion/223312/apple-adds-webm-web-audio-support-to-safari-in-latest-ios-15-beta
So you can only view webm video using the uber latest experimental
version of IOS/MacOS
On 17/04/2022 21:15, Alan wrote:
On 2022-04-17 1:38 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 16/04/2022 19:31, Alan wrote:
On 2022-04-16 12:46 a.m., alister wrote:
On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 08:36:37 +0100, Andy Burnelli wrote:
Jan Panteltje wrote:
I have a PCI par port card in one of my PCs its the only real I/O >>>>>>> on a
PC.
Now with raspi we have GPIO, a BIG win!!!!
Apple is overpriced crap.
I agree, and, more to the point of an educated astute observation... >>>>>>
The commonality of the raspi with almost _all_ other common consumer >>>>>> electronics is that every year the raspi (and most consumer
electronics)
gets (a) better, (b) faster, and (c) cheaper over time.
It's only the immensely hugely marketed electronic items which
don't get
(a) better, (b) faster, and (c) cheaper over time.
HINT #1: Apple spends the lowest of all of high tech in R&D, yet
Apple's
marketing budget is likely the largest of all high tech (bar none). >>>>>>
HINT #2: Guess why Apple products (which every year lose more and
more
functionality) get (a) worse, (b) faster, and (c) more expensive over >>>>>> time?
the reason is actually quite simple Apple are NOT primarily a
technology
company, they are a fashion house. change for the sake of change
every 6
months & your customer base will buy everything again because they
simply
must have the latest model or die of embarrassment
What utterly, patent bullshit.
They are clearly a technology company...
...and a very successful one.
Who told you that, then?
I learned it from years and years of experience.
Experience of what?
On 17/04/2022 21:20, Alan wrote:
On 2022-04-17 1:41 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 16/04/2022 20:28, alister wrote:
Apple have very much an attitude of you will only use our product
the way
we say you will use it.
And only on the protocols they sell themselves.
No apple based brower supports webm for example
Wow.
Utterly wrong.
Using Safari on my Mac, went here:
<https://www.webmfiles.org/demo-files/>
'Just try it below – if you see the video, your browser is capable of
playing WebM Videos.'
The video played fine.
no chance with vorbis/VP8
then get usb-c or lightning headphones, such as the ones that were
included in the box of the iphone you supposedly have.
On 2022-04-18 2:39 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 17/04/2022 21:15, Alan wrote:
On 2022-04-17 1:38 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 16/04/2022 19:31, Alan wrote:
On 2022-04-16 12:46 a.m., alister wrote:
On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 08:36:37 +0100, Andy Burnelli wrote:
Jan Panteltje wrote:
I have a PCI par port card in one of my PCs its the only real
I/O on a
PC.
Now with raspi we have GPIO, a BIG win!!!!
Apple is overpriced crap.
I agree, and, more to the point of an educated astute observation... >>>>>>>
The commonality of the raspi with almost _all_ other common consumer >>>>>>> electronics is that every year the raspi (and most consumer
electronics)
gets (a) better, (b) faster, and (c) cheaper over time.
It's only the immensely hugely marketed electronic items which
don't get
(a) better, (b) faster, and (c) cheaper over time.
HINT #1: Apple spends the lowest of all of high tech in R&D, yet >>>>>>> Apple's
marketing budget is likely the largest of all high tech (bar none). >>>>>>>
HINT #2: Guess why Apple products (which every year lose more and >>>>>>> more
functionality) get (a) worse, (b) faster, and (c) more expensive >>>>>>> over
time?
the reason is actually quite simple Apple are NOT primarily a
technology
company, they are a fashion house. change for the sake of change
every 6
months & your customer base will buy everything again because they >>>>>> simply
must have the latest model or die of embarrassment
What utterly, patent bullshit.
They are clearly a technology company...
...and a very successful one.
Who told you that, then?
I learned it from years and years of experience.
Experience of what?
Working, selling, supporting Macs and PCs for more than 30 years.
And the waterproof argument is a bit far fetched listen with phone upside down in the shower?
Dive with it listening underwater to the earplugs?
it's not far fetched at all.
an analog headphone jack is literally a hole in the phone where liquid
and dirt can ingress.
although it's possible to make it water resistant, that is a lot more difficult than if there was no hole at all, which should be obvious.
Ditto my recent Chrome OS tablet purchase. It too has only one port
(USB-C). No power supply, no earphone, and no dongle included.
yet you don't hear anyone complaining. only when apple does it.
Welcome
to the new world... (Though I didn't miss the PS since I've got a bag of
them.)
exactly why they're no longer included.
On 4/16/2022 11:41 PM, Jan Panteltje wrote:
<snip>
And of course the 3.5mm headphone jack provides better quality audio
than Bluetooth,
it does not.
the limiting factor is the transducer itself, not the connection method.
nospam is wrong of course™.
What makes no difference is whether the A/D and D/A for wired headphones
are inside the phone or inside the Lightning or USB-C dongle. There is
no difference in sound quality (unless you've purchased a junky
after-market dongle).
But there are multiple differences in sound quality between wired
headphones and Bluetooth headphones, depending on the phone and the headphones.
The iPhone does not yet support LDAC so high-end headphones like the
Sony WF-1000XM4 will not get as high quality sound as they will on an
Android device with LDAC (see <https://discussions.apple.com/thread/252917132>).
When using Bluetooth headphones and watching video, there is often a perceptible delay between the video and the audio, depending on both the phone and the headphones. For music, a few milliseconds of delay doesn't matter but when watching videos it does.
On Android devices, you can use the higher quality aptX HD or aptX
Adaptive codecs to mostly solve this issue.
That is not correct.
In my experience wireless links (bluetooth or whatever) are not very reliable.
Same for wireless keyboards, sometimes mine is obstructed by stuff on the table
that I then have to move,
A direct connection will always be better no matter the RF protocol.
Also I do not like bluetooth headsets I want no RF next to my head for long times,
though the Lightning to 3.5mm and USB to 3.5mm dongles
are just as good, it's just that the D/A and A/D are duplicated in the >>>> dongle. It's just an annoyance to have to buy and carry along one extra >>>> item.
then get usb-c or lightning headphones, such as the ones that were
included in the box of the iphone you supposedly have.
The small earbuds normally have a 90 degrees angled connector and do not have that 'lever'
sort of thing that can break the connector.
Some do, but most don't. The problem with the 90 degree plugs is that a
thick phone case will often prevent them from plugging in.
And of course my iPhone did not come with either a Lightning power
adapter or Lightning earpods, Apple stopped including those even on the
phone models that originally included them. Nor did it include a
Lightning to 3.5mm dongle, I had to buy that separately.
And the waterproof argument is a bit far fetched listen with phone upside down in the shower?
Dive with it listening underwater to the earplugs?
It's more for accidental dunkings of the phone. Of course there are IP68 phones that still have headphone jacks. My wife's old Moto X4 took a
dive in our pool and was no worse for wear despite the headphone jack.
She was gardening near the pool, it fell out of her pocket, and she
advised me to dive in to retrieve it. But it was in a protective case
which may have had a rubber plug over the headphone jack, I can't recall.
On a sunny day (Sat, 16 Apr 2022 18:05:03 -0700) it happened sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in <t3fp41$8sm$1@dont-email.me>:
On 4/16/2022 1:40 PM, meff wrote:
On 2022-04-16, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
Parallel ports are still used as control interfaces to small CNC >>>> machines in preference to USB because they provide better real time
control. Old computers with parallel ports command a surprising premium >>>> because of this.
Yeah I'm fully aware that there are situations that parallel ports
make more sense, and latency is a big one. Same with Serial ports as
there's no bring-up or negotiation process required along the port
(and if you can drive the serial port faster than the parallel port,
then it could potentially have higher throughput.) But not for most
consumer usecases.
It's become harder to directly read from, and write to, the parallel
port when using Windows versions beginning with Windows 7, as well as
more difficult because the I/O addresses are no longer the legacy ISA >>parallel port addresses. Of course you can still use MS-DOS or FreeDOS
if you're doing embedded systems control through the parallel port.
Linux
I have a Microchip PIC programmer connected to the PC parport,
the hardware design is from this person:
http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/noppp/
just modified it a bit,
and I wrote software for it.
No problem addressing the port
http://panteltje.com/panteltje/pic/jppp18/index.html
Also made a Raspberry version using GPIO:
http://panteltje.com/panteltje/raspberry_pi_noppp/
Just got some parts in to put it all on one small board,
No problem changing code from partport ot GPIO
But as PCs were getting faster and faster I had to add a delay loop command line option else the PIC could not keep up.
Not sure how this thread went from wired keyboards to 3.5mm audio jacks >>(when did 1/8" audio jacks become 3.5mm jacks?).
:-)
In article <t3fs3e$qe1$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
They did it because a deep jack like that makes for a mechanism for
damaging the phone if it gets levered.
No quite the oppsite. Given a certain torque (determined by the
outside), the forces damaging stuff inside are smaller the longer the
lever is and vice versa.
Wow, I've never seen the "torque" excuse before for eliminating the
headphone jack!
then you haven't done any research, to the surprise of absolutely
nobody.
By that logic, they should have gotten rid of the Lightning port since
it's much more prone to damage. Very creative!
wrong. lightning is specifically designed to be *less* prone for damage.
The reality is that a metal 3.5mm plug, inside the phone, is much less
subject to damage than the non-conductive PC board substrate that is
part of the Lightning connector.
nope. the reality is that lightning is designed to shear when torqued
so that the phone and its lightning connector are *not* damaged.
that means a repair is basically removing the now broken plug from the
port and replacing the cable, which is both easy and inexpensive, and
likely something someone can do on their own rather than take it to a
repair shop..
Of course a USB-C connector, both sides of which have a steel shell, is
also less subject to damage than a Lightning connector.
that is very much false.
usb-c does *not* have the above requirement, which means excessive
torque can cause damage to the port and/or the device. also, the
internal tab can break, which means the usb-c port would need to be
replaced, and for a phone, quite possibly the logic board, depending if
it's part of the same or a separate board.
Hopefully the
move to USB-C, which has already occurred with the iPad, will occur with
the iPhone by the iPhone 15. If Apple really wants to distinguish the
iPhone Pro versus non Pro models then they could use USB-C on the Pro
and Lightning on the non-Pro, like they initially did with the iPad.
that would be a huge clusterfuck, so much so that it's obviously
trolling.
apple doesn't care what you do with a product once it's been purchased.
But if you take the trouble to google a bit, then you will see, that even recently, Apple does a lot of dirty tricks
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/11/apple-settles-with-states-for-113m-over-iphone-battery-throttling/
nospam wrote:
In article <t3fs3e$qe1$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
They did it because a deep jack like that makes for a
mechanism for
damaging the phone if it gets levered.
No quite the oppsite. Given a certain torque (determined by the
outside), the forces damaging stuff inside are smaller the
longer the
lever is and vice versa.
Wow, I've never seen the "torque" excuse before for eliminating
the headphone jack!
then you haven't done any research, to the surprise of absolutely
nobody.
By that logic, they should have gotten rid of the Lightning port
since it's much more prone to damage. Very creative!
wrong. lightning is specifically designed to be *less* prone for
damage.
The reality is that a metal 3.5mm plug, inside the phone, is
much less subject to damage than the non-conductive PC board
substrate that is part of the Lightning connector.
nope. the reality is that lightning is designed to shear when
torqued
so that the phone and its lightning connector are *not* damaged.
that means a repair is basically removing the now broken plug
from the
port and replacing the cable, which is both easy and inexpensive,
and
likely something someone can do on their own rather than take it
to a
repair shop..
Of course a USB-C connector, both sides of which have a steel
shell, is also less subject to damage than a Lightning connector.
that is very much false.
usb-c does *not* have the above requirement, which means excessive
torque can cause damage to the port and/or the device. also, the
internal tab can break, which means the usb-c port would need to be
replaced, and for a phone, quite possibly the logic board,
depending if
it's part of the same or a separate board.
Hopefully the move to USB-C, which has already occurred with the
iPad, will occur with the iPhone by the iPhone 15. If Apple
really wants to distinguish the iPhone Pro versus non Pro models
then they could use USB-C on the Pro and Lightning on the
non-Pro, like they initially did with the iPad.
that would be a huge clusterfuck, so much so that it's obviously
trolling.
While nospam is consistent in his inconsistent arguments, the one
thing that
always remains is Apple designs proprietary connectors to make more
money.
No other reason.
In article <625C26FC.3B802F06@Berger-Odenthal.De>, Axel Berger <Spam@Berger-Odenthal.De> wrote:
Without any doubt the 68000 was a much better processor than the
comparable 80386. From then on Intel took off and left Motorola behind
(the 68030, 69040 never caught on commercially).
yes they did. the '030 and '040 were used not only in macs, but also in
many other products, including amiga, alpha, routers and more.
But up to than IBM sold
far inferior products through marketing clout.
true.
On 16/04/2022 20:28, alister wrote:
Apple have very much an attitude of you will only use our product the way
we say you will use it.
And only on the protocols they sell themselves.
No apple based brower supports webm for example
Apple will permanently _disable_ your iPhone if you refuse to log into their iCloud periodically
Want proof?
I _tested_ two iPads, both of which Apple _requires_ a login years later!
The only reason Apple made the "courageous" decision to remove common industry standard hardware functionality that is found on almost all
other devices.... is...
...is because very few people actually used an analog headphone jack to justify keeping it in a highly-space constrained device, such as a
phone, where that space could be better served for features that
benefit more people. also because it's redundant, because a more
functional option has existed alongside it.
Apple will permanently _disable_ your iPhone if you refuse to log into their >> iCloud periodically
that is categorically false, nor is that even possible.
Want proof?
there isn't any such proof.
as usual, you are too stupid to understand what you're doing and
blaming everything other than yourself.
I _tested_ two iPads, both of which Apple _requires_ a login years later!
you used a disposable email account, forgot the password, and locked
yourself out, with *no* possible way to recover it.
had you used a valid email, you could have reset the password.
in other words, the situation is entirely of your own making.
Years ago, in Texas, I worked on the Power PC project.
Remember that?
Prior to that, I worked with the 68701 (which had the RAM on chip).
One nice thing for hex coding was that the memory order made sense
(compared to that of the Intel MPUs).
Did you know that no Apple based browser supports TOR anonymity?
Look at what the Tor Project says about privacy with iOS devices.
dude, i've been writing ios apps for nearly 15 years and have tested
far more stuff than you can imagine even existing.
Apple will permanently _disable_ your iPhone if you refuse to log into
their iCloud periodically
that is categorically false, nor is that even possible.
Then you know nothing about iOS because I tested it and you haven't.
Look at what the Tor Project says about privacy with iOS devices.
apple browsers run on more than just ios devices, and ios devices are
the most private, causing facebook to lose roughly 25% of its market
cap in a single day because they can no longer data mine as well as
they once could.
The fact that you can't make an iOS browser private
Dude. Then explain this message if Apple doesn't _require_ periodic login:
<https://i.postimg.cc/nrFHSvby/appleid11.jpg>
In article <t3khdv$19r9$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:
Apple will permanently _disable_ your iPhone if you refuse to log
into their iCloud periodically
that is categorically false, nor is that even possible.
Then you know nothing about iOS because I tested it and you haven't.
dude, i've been writing ios apps for nearly 15 years and have tested
far more stuff than you can imagine even existing.
the fact is that apple does *not* (nor can they) disable a device for
any reason, certainly not refusing to log in to icloud.
a few years ago, i powered on my original iphone, after having sat
*unused* for something like 10 years (not sure exactly how long) and
it worked surprisingly well, considering how old it is.
the only issue was that some apps did little more than launch because
the needed servers no longer existed, nor did the developers of the
apps.
In article <t3kgga$u7m$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:
Years ago, in Texas, I worked on the Power PC project.
that's a new one.
what did you supposedly do on 'the power pc project' ?
did photos of textbooks about vacuum tubes help with the design of a microprocessor?
what happened to your usual story about working at silicon valley
companies alongside super-smart people after having gone to the best
colleges in the world?
or have you confused silicon valley, california with silicon hills,
texas, what the tech companies mostly in austin are called?
Remember that?
very much so, more than you.
Prior to that, I worked with the 68701 (which had the RAM on chip).
that's a 6800 variant, unrelated to macs, and a lot of microcontrollers
of that era had ram on the chip, along with i/o.
i designed and built a few things with the 6801.
One nice thing for hex coding was that the memory order made sense
(compared to that of the Intel MPUs).
yet you don't know the proper terminology, known as little-endian and big-endian, and you also don't know that the power pc supported both.
nospam wrote:
dude, i've been writing ios apps for nearly 15 years and have tested
far more stuff than you can imagine even existing.
Dude. Then explain this message if Apple doesn't _require_ periodic login: <https://i.postimg.cc/nrFHSvby/appleid11.jpg>
On 18/04/2022 18:20, Alan wrote:
On 2022-04-18 2:39 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 17/04/2022 21:15, Alan wrote:
On 2022-04-17 1:38 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 16/04/2022 19:31, Alan wrote:
On 2022-04-16 12:46 a.m., alister wrote:
On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 08:36:37 +0100, Andy Burnelli wrote:
Jan Panteltje wrote:
I have a PCI par port card in one of my PCs its the only real >>>>>>>>> I/O on a
PC.
Now with raspi we have GPIO, a BIG win!!!!
Apple is overpriced crap.
I agree, and, more to the point of an educated astute
observation...
The commonality of the raspi with almost _all_ other common
consumer
electronics is that every year the raspi (and most consumer
electronics)
gets (a) better, (b) faster, and (c) cheaper over time.
It's only the immensely hugely marketed electronic items which >>>>>>>> don't get
(a) better, (b) faster, and (c) cheaper over time.
HINT #1: Apple spends the lowest of all of high tech in R&D, yet >>>>>>>> Apple's
marketing budget is likely the largest of all high tech (bar none). >>>>>>>>
HINT #2: Guess why Apple products (which every year lose more
and more
functionality) get (a) worse, (b) faster, and (c) more expensive >>>>>>>> over
time?
the reason is actually quite simple Apple are NOT primarily a
technology
company, they are a fashion house. change for the sake of change >>>>>>> every 6
months & your customer base will buy everything again because
they simply
must have the latest model or die of embarrassment
What utterly, patent bullshit.
They are clearly a technology company...
...and a very successful one.
Who told you that, then?
I learned it from years and years of experience.
Experience of what?
Working, selling, supporting Macs and PCs for more than 30 years.
So what?
nospam wrote:
And the waterproof argument is a bit far fetched listen with phone
upside down in the shower?
Dive with it listening underwater to the earplugs?
it's not far fetched at all.
It's a stretch to claim that all phones with the industry standard 3.5mm
jack can't have the same water resistance ratings of phones that lack it.
nospam wrote:
then get usb-c or lightning headphones, such as the ones that were
included in the box of the iphone you supposedly have.
The intelligent people here will note that Apple removed basic
functionality
in three phases so as to hide the facts from the ignorati like nospam is.
1. First the iPhone had the industry standard 3.5mm jack on the device.
2. Then Apple _removed_ the functionality - but supplanted it in the box.
3. Then Apple removed that crutch so that you'd now have to buy it back.
Clever Apple, steadily removing functionality so you have to buy it back.
sms wrote:
On 4/16/2022 11:41 PM, Jan Panteltje wrote:
<snip>
And of course the 3.5mm headphone jack provides better quality audio >>>>> than Bluetooth,
it does not.
the limiting factor is the transducer itself, not the connection
method.
nospam is wrong of course™.
What makes no difference is whether the A/D and D/A for wired
headphones are inside the phone or inside the Lightning or USB-C
dongle. There is no difference in sound quality (unless you've
purchased a junky after-market dongle).
But there are multiple differences in sound quality between wired
headphones and Bluetooth headphones, depending on the phone and the
headphones.
The iPhone does not yet support LDAC so high-end headphones like the
Sony WF-1000XM4 will not get as high quality sound as they will on an
Android device with LDAC (see
<https://discussions.apple.com/thread/252917132>).
When using Bluetooth headphones and watching video, there is often a
perceptible delay between the video and the audio, depending on both
the phone and the headphones. For music, a few milliseconds of delay
doesn't matter but when watching videos it does.
On Android devices, you can use the higher quality aptX HD or aptX
Adaptive codecs to mostly solve this issue.
That is not correct.
In my experience wireless links (bluetooth or whatever) are not very
reliable.
Same for wireless keyboards, sometimes mine is obstructed by stuff on
the table
that I then have to move,
A direct connection will always be better no matter the RF protocol.
Also I do not like bluetooth headsets I want no RF next to my head
for long times,
though the Lightning to 3.5mm and USB to 3.5mm dongles
are just as good, it's just that the D/A and A/D are duplicated in the >>>>> dongle. It's just an annoyance to have to buy and carry along one
extra
item.
then get usb-c or lightning headphones, such as the ones that were
included in the box of the iphone you supposedly have.
The small earbuds normally have a 90 degrees angled connector and do
not have that 'lever'
sort of thing that can break the connector.
Some do, but most don't. The problem with the 90 degree plugs is that
a thick phone case will often prevent them from plugging in.
And of course my iPhone did not come with either a Lightning power
adapter or Lightning earpods, Apple stopped including those even on
the phone models that originally included them. Nor did it include a
Lightning to 3.5mm dongle, I had to buy that separately.
And the waterproof argument is a bit far fetched listen with phone
upside down in the shower?
Dive with it listening underwater to the earplugs?
It's more for accidental dunkings of the phone. Of course there are
IP68 phones that still have headphone jacks. My wife's old Moto X4
took a dive in our pool and was no worse for wear despite the
headphone jack. She was gardening near the pool, it fell out of her
pocket, and she advised me to dive in to retrieve it. But it was in a
protective case which may have had a rubber plug over the headphone
jack, I can't recall.
It's a red herring to discuss the pros and cons since the reason Apple removed the industry standard 3.5 mm jack was to make you buy it back.
Every time nospam claims that it makes it _easier_ to design a water resistant phone without the industry standard jack, all nospam is _really_ saying is that *nospam believes Apple has a shitty hardware design team.*
And he'd be right.
*Apple is _NOT_ a design powerhouse*; Apple is a MARKETING powerhouse. (Apple's R&D is less than Germany's Nato percentage spending for example).
nospam wrote:
In article <625C26FC.3B802F06@Berger-Odenthal.De>, Axel Berger
<Spam@Berger-Odenthal.De> wrote:
Without any doubt the 68000 was a much better processor than the
comparable 80386. From then on Intel took off and left Motorola behind
(the 68030, 69040 never caught on commercially).
yes they did. the '030 and '040 were used not only in macs, but also in
many other products, including amiga, alpha, routers and more.
But up to than IBM sold
far inferior products through marketing clout.
true.
Years ago, in Texas, I worked on the Power PC project.
Remember that?
Prior to that, I worked with the 68701 (which had the RAM on chip).
One nice thing for hex coding was that the memory order made sense
(compared to that of the Intel MPUs).
nospam wrote:
apple doesn't care what you do with a product once it's been purchased.
Apple will permanently _disable_ your iPhone if you refuse to log into
their
iCloud periodically nospam. You _know_ this is true.
Want proof?
I _tested_ two iPads, both of which Apple _requires_ a login years later!
On 2022-04-18 1:08 p.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
nospam wrote:
In article <625C26FC.3B802F06@Berger-Odenthal.De>, Axel Berger
<Spam@Berger-Odenthal.De> wrote:
Without any doubt the 68000 was a much better processor than the
comparable 80386. From then on Intel took off and left Motorola
behind (the 68030, 69040 never caught on commercially).
yes they did. the '030 and '040 were used not only in macs, but also
in many other products, including amiga, alpha, routers and more.
But up to than IBM sold far inferior products through marketing
clout.
true.
Years ago, in Texas, I worked on the Power PC project. Remember
that?
Really?
Got any proof of that?
On 2022-04-18 11:59 a.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
It's a red herring to discuss the pros and cons since the reason Apple
removed the industry standard 3.5 mm jack was to make you buy it back.
Incorrect.
saying is that *nospam believes Apple has a shitty hardware design team.*
And he'd be right.
It does make it easier.
It's a red herring to discuss the pros and cons since the reason Apple
removed the industry standard 3.5 mm jack was to make you buy it back.
Incorrect.
Yes, he is incorrect.
the primary reason was to encourage the purchase
of AirPods.
The secondary reason was to reduce manufacturing cost.
I doubt if the profit from selling the dongles would even show up as a
blip in their reports, even though they sold a LOT of those dongles.
I recall reading an article that said the the dongle was the best selling Apple product at Best Buy for a while,
On 4/18/2022 6:08 PM, Alan wrote:
On 2022-04-18 11:59 a.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
<snip>
It's a red herring to discuss the pros and cons since the reason Apple
removed the industry standard 3.5 mm jack was to make you buy it back.
Incorrect.
Yes, he is incorrect. the primary reason was to encourage the purchase
of AirPods. The secondary reason was to reduce manufacturing cost. I
doubt if the profit from selling the dongles would even show up as a
blip in their reports, even though they sold a LOT of those dongles. I
recall reading an article that said the the dongle was the best selling
Apple product at Best Buy for a while, see <https://wccftech.com/apple-dongles-top-selling-items-best-buy/>.
saying is that *nospam believes Apple has a shitty hardware design
team.*
And he'd be right.
It does make it easier.
It makes it easier, but other manufacturers have managed IP68 even with
a headphone jack.
nospam wrote:
apple doesn't care what you do with a product once it's been purchased.
Apple will permanently _disable_ your iPhone if you refuse to log into their >iCloud periodically nospam. You _know_ this is true.
Want proof?
I _tested_ two iPads, both of which Apple _requires_ a login years later!
If you don't eventually log into their iCloud - Apple _disables_ the device! >Don't believe me?
Look here:
1. Apple "ID Verification" prompts come up ten, twenty or more times a day.
<https://i.postimg.cc/LXzB3Lc0/appleid01.jpg>
2. Apple "Sign-in to iCloud" prompts come up a dozen or more times a day.
<https://i.postimg.cc/Y9kkj19v/appleid12.jpg>
3. Apple won't let you sign in even with the _correct_ login & password.
<https://i.postimg.cc/8zSvshQf/appleid04.jpg>
4. The Apple web site is so poorly designed it doesn't even tell you why.
<https://i.postimg.cc/SKGfmgnK/appleid05.jpg>
5. Eventually, as it did with one of my iPads already, Apple destroys it.
<https://i.postimg.cc/g008YhxP/appleid02.jpg>
<https://i.postimg.cc/q75t7MSk/appleid03.jpg>
6. On my 2nd iPad, the Apple apps stop working (but everything else works!)
<https://i.postimg.cc/hhFNJ5mq/appleid010.jpg>
7. Every single day, many times a day, you're confronted with tracking crap
such as this "Some account services require you to sign in again"
<https://i.postimg.cc/nrFHSvby/appleid11.jpg>
8. Interestingly, you can update your iOS (which I almost never do) as shown
here where I updated this week from iOS 13 to iOS 15 (and it let me).
<https://i.postimg.cc/nLjqk2HD/osupdate03.jpg>
9. And you can wipe out your Siri recordings (due to the recent zero-day).
<https://i.postimg.cc/sfZ0XP71/osupdate02.jpg>
10. Yet Apple tracking servers still require "Apple ID Verification"
<https://i.postimg.cc/gj0r2cBP/osupdate01.jpg>
11. And, you can install an app, but if you delete it, you can't re-install.
<https://i.postimg.cc/bJPKDSZ1/osupdate04.jpg>
<https://i.postimg.cc/ZR5mZ287/appleid07.jpg>
12. In the end, if you attempt that forced validation on VPN, Apple
unilaterally destroys your investment by locking you out of it forever!
<https://i.postimg.cc/q75t7MSk/appleid03.jpg>
13. All because Apple tracking servers _require_ periodic ID verification.
<https://i.postimg.cc/8k3GQyj4/appleid09.jpg>
<https://i.postimg.cc/q75t7MSk/appleid03.jpg>
On a sunny day (Mon, 18 Apr 2022 16:12:43 -0400) it happened nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in <180420221612438873%nospam@nospam.invalid>:
In article <t3kclh$18cc$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:
The only reason Apple made the "courageous" decision to remove common
industry standard hardware functionality that is found on almost all
other devices.... is...
...is because very few people actually used an analog headphone jack to
justify keeping it in a highly-space constrained device, such as a
phone, where that space could be better served for features that
benefit more people. also because it's redundant, because a more
functional option has existed alongside it.
As somebody else already pointed out,
the analog jack with cable is required for FM radio reception,
the headphone lead in that case functions as antenna.
In article <t3kclh$18cc$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:
The only reason Apple made the "courageous" decision to remove common
industry standard hardware functionality that is found on almost all
other devices.... is...
...is because very few people actually used an analog headphone jack to >justify keeping it in a highly-space constrained device, such as a
phone, where that space could be better served for features that
benefit more people. also because it's redundant, because a more
functional option has existed alongside it.
The secondary reason was to reduce manufacturing cost.
also wrong. the difference is negligible.
It's a red herring to discuss the pros and cons since the reason Apple
removed the industry standard 3.5 mm jack was to make you buy it back.
Incorrect.
Yes, he is incorrect. the primary reason was to encourage the purchase
of AirPods.
On 2022-04-18 10:56 p.m., Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Mon, 18 Apr 2022 16:12:43 -0400) it happened nospam
<nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in <180420221612438873%nospam@nospam.invalid>: >>
In article <t3kclh$18cc$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:
The only reason Apple made the "courageous" decision to remove common
industry standard hardware functionality that is found on almost all
other devices.... is...
...is because very few people actually used an analog headphone jack to
justify keeping it in a highly-space constrained device, such as a
phone, where that space could be better served for features that
benefit more people. also because it's redundant, because a more
functional option has existed alongside it.
As somebody else already pointed out,
the analog jack with cable is required for FM radio reception,
the headphone lead in that case functions as antenna.
Since no iPhone ever had FM radio...
It's consistent how the iKooks deny all facts about Apple that they hate.
And yet, the iKooks _never_ seem to be able to supply the facts themselves.
It's as if their _entire_ belief system is _completely_ imaginary.
Whenever you detect a potential emotional bias to a narrative, the implication that those not 'with it' are incurable Neanderthals, an/or research that implies that '97% of everybody who counts believes in it'
you may be sure its snake oil...
As somebody else already pointed out,
the analog jack with cable is required for FM radio reception,
the headphone lead in that case functions as antenna.
Since no iPhone ever had FM radio...
Really?
How bad, no radio in an emergency 'THE RUSSIANS ARE COMING HIDE UNDER THE TABLE AND LISTEN FOR 100.1MHz' sort of thing :-)
'No radio' is an other no-no to ever buy Apple,
Sometimes there is good music on FM.
I even have some Chinese old phone that could show analog TV when it was still here.
And from the news TODAY:
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2022/04/a-year-after-apple-enforces-app-tracking-policy-covert-ios-tracking-remains/
As somebody else already pointed out,
the analog jack with cable is required for FM radio reception,
the headphone lead in that case functions as antenna.
In article <t3lj38$fas$1@dont-email.me>, Jan Panteltje ><pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:
As somebody else already pointed out,
the analog jack with cable is required for FM radio reception,
the headphone lead in that case functions as antenna.
fm radio is almost never used on a phone for a number of reasons,
including a distance limit of roughly 50 miles (usually less due to
terrain) and that headphones are required (and not coiled up stuffed
into a pocket), making it impossible to listen with bluetooth wireless
headphones, the internal speakers or external speakers.
smartphones do not have any of those limitations and can streamstations from anywhere in the world,
and not just fm, but also am,
police/fire, air traffic control and more.
more commonly, smartphones stream from music services such as spotify
or from podcast networks, and of course, anything stored locally on the >phone.
people can listen via any headset, wired or wireless, internal
speakers, which on many phones are reasonably good, or external
speakers.
In article <t3lnti$c5d$1@dont-email.me>, Jan Panteltje ><pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:
As somebody else already pointed out,
the analog jack with cable is required for FM radio reception,
the headphone lead in that case functions as antenna.
Since no iPhone ever had FM radio...
Really?
really. nor do almost all android phones as well as feature phones.
it's not something that is in any demand, let alone high demand.
In article <t3lj8c$glu$1@dont-email.me>, Jan Panteltje ><pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:
And from the news TODAY:
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2022/04/a-year-after-apple-enforces-app-tracking-policy-covert-ios-tracking-remains/
yet another thing you don't understand.
that's about third party companies who continue to track people despite
the user choosing to not be tracked.
And from the news TODAY:
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2022/04/a-year-after-apple-
enforces-app-tracking-policy-covert-ios-tracking-remains/
yet another thing you don't understand.
that's about third party companies who continue to track people despite
the user choosing to not be tracked.
Try learning to read
1)
I get 5 or six FM stations here, just plugged my big Sennheiser headphones into my Xiaomi smartphone.
smartphones do not have any of those limitations and can streamstations from anywhere in the world,
3)
Only if you are in range, payed for the (maybe prepaid) subscription to your provider
4)
AND only if the tower still stands (some here were burned down by anti-5G protesters a while back),
5)
and only if that provider does not have a blackout (like Vodafone has here on a regular basis it seems).
and not just fm, but also am,
police/fire, air traffic control and more.
AM is pretty much dead here.
Jan Panteltje wrote:
Steve Jobs went on (later) about Apple's superior processors used
for nuclear research testing.
Without any doubt the 68000 was a much better processor than the
comparable 80386. From then on Intel took off and left Motorola behind
(the 68030, 69040 never caught on commercially). But up to than IBM sold
far inferior products through marketing clout.
The biggest issue Apple ran into with the PowerPC processors was the
high tdp (thermal design power).
It didn't matter much for desktops but
it was causing the Macbook to fall too far behind the power/performance/battery life of X86 Windows laptops.
"PowerPC
processors had the potential to be very fast, but they ran hot and
required a lot of power, which is bad for laptops," <https://mashable.com/article/intel-macs-at-10>.
The move to X86, and the ability to dual boot Windows and OS-X, also
enabled sales of Macs to a much wider user base,
"Even though Apple
primarily moved from PowerPC to Intel x86 for performance reasons,
one
of the huge advantages of the move was that for the first time, Mac
users could run Windows natively on Mac hardware,"
XPost: comp.mobile.android, misc.phone.mobile.iphone
In article <t3lj38$fas$1@dont-email.me>, Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:
As somebody else already pointed out,
the analog jack with cable is required for FM radio reception,
the headphone lead in that case functions as antenna.
fm radio is almost never used on a phone for a number of reasons,
including a distance limit of roughly 50 miles (usually less due to
terrain) and that headphones are required (and not coiled up stuffed
into a pocket), making it impossible to listen with bluetooth wireless headphones, the internal speakers or external speakers.
smartphones do not have any of those limitations and can stream
stations from anywhere in the world, and not just fm, but also am, police/fire, air traffic control and more.
more commonly, smartphones stream from music services such as spotify
or from podcast networks, and of course, anything stored locally on the phone.
people can listen via any headset, wired or wireless, internal
speakers, which on many phones are reasonably good, or external
speakers.
On a sunny day (Mon, 18 Apr 2022 23:01:04 -0700) it happened Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote in <t3lj70$f8e$1@dont-email.me>:
On 2022-04-18 10:56 p.m., Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Mon, 18 Apr 2022 16:12:43 -0400) it happened nospam
<nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in <180420221612438873%nospam@nospam.invalid>:
In article <t3kclh$18cc$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:
The only reason Apple made the "courageous" decision to remove common >>>>> industry standard hardware functionality that is found on almost all >>>>> other devices.... is...
...is because very few people actually used an analog headphone jack to >>>> justify keeping it in a highly-space constrained device, such as a
phone, where that space could be better served for features that
benefit more people. also because it's redundant, because a more
functional option has existed alongside it.
As somebody else already pointed out,
the analog jack with cable is required for FM radio reception,
the headphone lead in that case functions as antenna.
Since no iPhone ever had FM radio...
Really?
How bad, no radio in an emergency 'THE RUSSIANS ARE COMING HIDE UNDER THE TABLE AND LISTEN FOR 100.1MHz' sort of thing :-)
'No radio' is an other no-no to ever buy Apple,
Sometimes there is good music on FM.
I even have some Chinese old phone that could show analog TV when it was still here.
On 2022-04-19 12:19 a.m., Jan Panteltje wrote:Inclined to agree. Whilst I-pods may have had VHF radio, no cellphone
On a sunny day (Mon, 18 Apr 2022 23:01:04 -0700) it happened Alan
<nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote in <t3lj70$f8e$1@dont-email.me>:
On 2022-04-18 10:56 p.m., Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Mon, 18 Apr 2022 16:12:43 -0400) it happened nospam
<nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in
<180420221612438873%nospam@nospam.invalid>:
In article <t3kclh$18cc$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:
The only reason Apple made the "courageous" decision to remove common >>>>>> industry standard hardware functionality that is found on almost all >>>>>> other devices.... is...
...is because very few people actually used an analog headphone
jack to
justify keeping it in a highly-space constrained device, such as a
phone, where that space could be better served for features that
benefit more people. also because it's redundant, because a more
functional option has existed alongside it.
As somebody else already pointed out,
the analog jack with cable is required for FM radio reception,
the headphone lead in that case functions as antenna.
Since no iPhone ever had FM radio...
Really?
How bad, no radio in an emergency 'THE RUSSIANS ARE COMING HIDE UNDER
THE TABLE AND LISTEN FOR 100.1MHz' sort of thing :-)
'No radio' is an other no-no to ever buy Apple,
Sometimes there is good music on FM.
I even have some Chinese old phone that could show analog TV when it
was still here.
Bullshit.
In article <t3khdv$19r9$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:
Apple will permanently _disable_ your iPhone if you refuse to log into >>>> their iCloud periodically
that is categorically false, nor is that even possible.
Then you know nothing about iOS because I tested it and you haven't.
dude, i've been writing ios apps for nearly 15 years and have tested
far more stuff than you can imagine even existing.
the fact is that apple does *not* (nor can they) disable a device for
any reason, certainly not refusing to log in to icloud.
a few years ago, i powered on my original iphone, after having sat
*unused* for something like 10 years (not sure exactly how long) and it worked surprisingly well, considering how old it is.
the only issue was that some apps did little more than launch because
the needed servers no longer existed, nor did the developers of the
apps.
On 19/04/2022 15:42, Alan wrote:
On 2022-04-19 12:19 a.m., Jan Panteltje wrote:Inclined to agree. Whilst I-pods may have had VHF radio, no cellphone
On a sunny day (Mon, 18 Apr 2022 23:01:04 -0700) it happened Alan
<nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote in <t3lj70$f8e$1@dont-email.me>:
On 2022-04-18 10:56 p.m., Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Mon, 18 Apr 2022 16:12:43 -0400) it happened nospam
<nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in
<180420221612438873%nospam@nospam.invalid>:
In article <t3kclh$18cc$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:
The only reason Apple made the "courageous" decision to remove
common
industry standard hardware functionality that is found on almost all >>>>>>> other devices.... is...
...is because very few people actually used an analog headphone
jack to
justify keeping it in a highly-space constrained device, such as a >>>>>> phone, where that space could be better served for features that
benefit more people. also because it's redundant, because a more
functional option has existed alongside it.
As somebody else already pointed out,
the analog jack with cable is required for FM radio reception,
the headphone lead in that case functions as antenna.
Since no iPhone ever had FM radio...
Really?
How bad, no radio in an emergency 'THE RUSSIANS ARE COMING HIDE UNDER
THE TABLE AND LISTEN FOR 100.1MHz' sort of thing :-)
'No radio' is an other no-no to ever buy Apple,
Sometimes there is good music on FM.
I even have some Chinese old phone that could show analog TV when it
was still here.
Bullshit.
IOS or android has VHF hardware built in to best of my knowledge.
I use 'radio over the internet' when out and about with mine
I get 5 or six FM stations here, just plugged my big Sennheiser headphones into my Xiaomi smartphone.
On 4/18/2022 6:08 PM, Alan wrote:
On 2022-04-18 11:59 a.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
<snip>
It's a red herring to discuss the pros and cons since the reason
Apple removed the industry standard 3.5 mm jack was to make you buy
it back.
Incorrect.
Yes, he is incorrect. the primary reason was to encourage the purchase
of AirPods.
In article <t3l443$vv$1@dont-email.me>, sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
It's a red herring to discuss the pros and cons since the reason
Apple removed the industry standard 3.5 mm jack was to make you
buy it back.
Incorrect.
Yes, he is incorrect.
as are you.
the primary reason was to encourage the purchase of AirPods.
that is absolutely false.
in fact, airpods weren't even available when the iphone 7 was
released.
On 19/04/2022 15:42, Alan wrote:
On 2022-04-19 12:19 a.m., Jan Panteltje wrote:Inclined to agree. Whilst I-pods may have had VHF radio, no cellphone
On a sunny day (Mon, 18 Apr 2022 23:01:04 -0700) it happened Alan
<nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote in <t3lj70$f8e$1@dont-email.me>:
On 2022-04-18 10:56 p.m., Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Mon, 18 Apr 2022 16:12:43 -0400) it happened nospam
<nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in
<180420221612438873%nospam@nospam.invalid>:
In article <t3kclh$18cc$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:
The only reason Apple made the "courageous" decision to remove common >>>>>>> industry standard hardware functionality that is found on almost all >>>>>>> other devices.... is...
...is because very few people actually used an analog headphone
jack to
justify keeping it in a highly-space constrained device, such as a >>>>>> phone, where that space could be better served for features that
benefit more people. also because it's redundant, because a more
functional option has existed alongside it.
As somebody else already pointed out,
the analog jack with cable is required for FM radio reception,
the headphone lead in that case functions as antenna.
Since no iPhone ever had FM radio...
Really?
How bad, no radio in an emergency 'THE RUSSIANS ARE COMING HIDE UNDER
THE TABLE AND LISTEN FOR 100.1MHz' sort of thing :-)
'No radio' is an other no-no to ever buy Apple,
Sometimes there is good music on FM.
I even have some Chinese old phone that could show analog TV when it
was still here.
Bullshit.
IOS or android has VHF hardware built in to best of my knowledge.
I use 'radio over the internet' when out and about with mine
Smartphoens will rape your data plan very hard if you depend on streaming services for listening to music or newscasts, hence heavy FM use in areas where Internet connectivity is not plentyful.
Inclined to agree. Whilst I-pods may have had VHF radio, no cellphoneI even have some Chinese old phone that could show analog TV when it
was still here.
Bullshit.
IOS or android has VHF hardware built in to best of my knowledge.
I use 'radio over the internet' when out and about with mine
PXphone
http://www.cronotebook.com/SKU267104328.htm
mine is an older model.
Never use it, as analog TV is no longer transmitted here and I have 3 other more modern phones (no apples).
the primary reason was to encourage the purchase of AirPods.
that is absolutely false.
Especially considering Apple included a set of Lightning headphones in
the box at the time. : )
On 2022-04-19 7:58 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 19/04/2022 15:42, Alan wrote:
On 2022-04-19 12:19 a.m., Jan Panteltje wrote:Inclined to agree. Whilst I-pods may have had VHF radio, no cellphone
On a sunny day (Mon, 18 Apr 2022 23:01:04 -0700) it happened Alan
<nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote in <t3lj70$f8e$1@dont-email.me>:
On 2022-04-18 10:56 p.m., Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Mon, 18 Apr 2022 16:12:43 -0400) it happened nospam >>>>>> <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in
<180420221612438873%nospam@nospam.invalid>:
In article <t3kclh$18cc$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:
The only reason Apple made the "courageous" decision to remove >>>>>>>> common
industry standard hardware functionality that is found on almost >>>>>>>> all
other devices.... is...
...is because very few people actually used an analog headphone
jack to
justify keeping it in a highly-space constrained device, such as a >>>>>>> phone, where that space could be better served for features that >>>>>>> benefit more people. also because it's redundant, because a more >>>>>>> functional option has existed alongside it.
As somebody else already pointed out,
the analog jack with cable is required for FM radio reception,
the headphone lead in that case functions as antenna.
Since no iPhone ever had FM radio...
Really?
How bad, no radio in an emergency 'THE RUSSIANS ARE COMING HIDE
UNDER THE TABLE AND LISTEN FOR 100.1MHz' sort of thing :-)
'No radio' is an other no-no to ever buy Apple,
Sometimes there is good music on FM.
I even have some Chinese old phone that could show analog TV when it
was still here.
Bullshit.
IOS or android has VHF hardware built in to best of my knowledge.
I use 'radio over the internet' when out and about with mine
And while a good many phones do have FM as a feature, I would be a lot
of money that most people never use it or are even aware of it.
PXphone
http://www.cronotebook.com/SKU267104328.htm
mine is an older model.
Never use it, as analog TV is no longer transmitted here and I have 3 other more modern phones (no apples).
There's an Android OTG USB-C adapter for receiving ATSC digital TV
broadcasts on Android phones and tablets.
This is detailed in the document
On Android devices without an FM radio you can use an RTL-SDR receiver
in the USB OTG port,see <https://us.amazon.com/dp/B07XPZMDZV>
On 4/19/2022 8:35 AM, Jan Panteltje wrote:
<snip>
PXphone
http://www.cronotebook.com/SKU267104328.htm
mine is an older model.
Never use it, as analog TV is no longer transmitted here and I have 3 other more modern phones (no apples).
There's an Android OTG USB-C adapter for receiving ATSC digital TV
broadcasts on Android phones and tablets. See ><https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07GPB6VFX>. It comes with two antennas.
This is detailed in the document
<<https://tinyurl.com/iOS-Android-Features> as 158a on page 66.
I used to use Locast to watch TV on my laptop, and it was also available
on Android and iOS, but Locast got shut down ><https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2021/09/locasts-free-tv-service-ordered-to-shut-down-permanently-after-copyright-loss/>.
Do they? I couldn't find a single example
On 19/04/2022 16:14, Alan wrote:
On 2022-04-19 7:58 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 19/04/2022 15:42, Alan wrote:
On 2022-04-19 12:19 a.m., Jan Panteltje wrote:Inclined to agree. Whilst I-pods may have had VHF radio, no cellphone
On a sunny day (Mon, 18 Apr 2022 23:01:04 -0700) it happened Alan
<nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote in <t3lj70$f8e$1@dont-email.me>:
On 2022-04-18 10:56 p.m., Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Mon, 18 Apr 2022 16:12:43 -0400) it happened nospam >>>>>>> <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in
<180420221612438873%nospam@nospam.invalid>:
In article <t3kclh$18cc$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:
The only reason Apple made the "courageous" decision to remove >>>>>>>>> common
industry standard hardware functionality that is found on
almost all
other devices.... is...
...is because very few people actually used an analog headphone >>>>>>>> jack to
justify keeping it in a highly-space constrained device, such as a >>>>>>>> phone, where that space could be better served for features that >>>>>>>> benefit more people. also because it's redundant, because a more >>>>>>>> functional option has existed alongside it.
As somebody else already pointed out,
the analog jack with cable is required for FM radio reception,
the headphone lead in that case functions as antenna.
Since no iPhone ever had FM radio...
Really?
How bad, no radio in an emergency 'THE RUSSIANS ARE COMING HIDE
UNDER THE TABLE AND LISTEN FOR 100.1MHz' sort of thing :-)
'No radio' is an other no-no to ever buy Apple,
Sometimes there is good music on FM.
I even have some Chinese old phone that could show analog TV when
it was still here.
Bullshit.
IOS or android has VHF hardware built in to best of my knowledge.
I use 'radio over the internet' when out and about with mine
And while a good many phones do have FM as a feature, I would be a lot
of money that most people never use it or are even aware of it.
Do they? I couldn't find a single example
In article <650392066@f1.n770.z10242.fidonet.org>, Richard Falken <nospam.Richard.Falken@f1.n770.z10242.fidonet.org> wrote:
Smartphoens will rape your data plan very hard if you depend on streaming service
for listening to music or newscasts, hence heavy FM use in areas where Internet
connectivity is not plentyful.
cellular data plans are only needed if there's no wifi.
most people have wifi at home, work and/or school, which is where they normally listen to the radio (or watch tv), and won't need to use *any* cellular da
Do they? I couldn't find a single example
In article <jc83vcF8ilsU3@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
<jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
the primary reason was to encourage the purchase of AirPods.
that is absolutely false.
Especially considering Apple included a set of Lightning headphones
in the box at the time. : )
*and* they included a lightning adapter.
it's hard to encourage buying something new when *two* solutions are
provided in the box.
In message <t3mohd$u0j$1@dont-email.me>, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes
Do they? I couldn't find a single example
I just tried my Galaxy A5,and that worked as an FM radio (with data and
WiFi turned off). Not brilliant, but better than nothing. The
earphone/mic lead also acts as the aerial.
Never use it, as analog TV is no longer transmitted here and I have 3 other more modern phones (no apples).
the specs say 640x480 resolution, which is incredibly shitty.
However it is as good as you get for analogue TV.
Adrian <bulleid@ku.gro.lioff> wrote:
In message <t3mohd$u0j$1@dont-email.me>, The Natural Philosopher
<tnp@invalid.invalid> writes
Do they? I couldn't find a single example
I just tried my Galaxy A5,and that worked as an FM radio (with data and
WiFi turned off). Not brilliant, but better than nothing. The
earphone/mic lead also acts as the aerial.
My previous Huawei phones had FM radios and my current Samsung Galaxy
A51 has one as well.
I wish someone would sell FM radios, so I don't have to buy
smartphones all the time!
On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 12:37:20 -0400
nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
In article <t3ml0s$2dt$1@dont-email.me>, Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:
Never use it, as analog TV is no longer transmitted here and I have 3 other more modern phones (no apples).
the specs say 640x480 resolution, which is incredibly shitty.
However it is as good as you get for analogue TV.
In article <t3ml0s$2dt$1@dont-email.me>, Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:
Never use it, as analog TV is no longer transmitted here and I have 3
other more modern phones (no apples).
the specs say 640x480 resolution, which is incredibly shitty.
And where do you go that has FM coverage...
...but no cellular data?
You're assuming that everyone has unlimited data with which to stream
radio stations.
But actually, depending on the carrier, there are definitely places
where there is FM coverage but no cellular data.
OTOH, when going through those areas the user is likely to be in their vehicle which will have an FM radio with superior reception quality.
And where do you go that has FM coverage...
...but no cellular data?
Adrian <bulleid@ku.gro.lioff> wrote:
In message <t3mohd$u0j$1@dont-email.me>, The Natural Philosopher
<tnp@invalid.invalid> writes
Do they? I couldn't find a single example
I just tried my Galaxy A5,and that worked as an FM radio (with data and
WiFi turned off). Not brilliant, but better than nothing. The
earphone/mic lead also acts as the aerial.
My previous Huawei phones had FM radios and my current Samsung Galaxy
A51 has one as well.
I wish someone would sell FM radios, so I don't have to buy
smartphones all the time!
At least most radio stations do free streaming of their OTA content
so if you have unlimited data there's no cost.
This kind of makes sense
since the more listeners they have the more they can charge for advertising.
It actually would be nice to have a smart phone with a TV tuner since at least in the U.S. local TV stations don't follow the same free model as
radio stations and you can't stream the same, free, live, OTA content.
One nice thing for hex coding was that the memory order made sense
(compared to that of the Intel MPUs).
yet you don't know the proper terminology, known as little-endian and big-endian, and you also don't know that the power pc supported both.
"hex coding" ... "memory order" ...
LOL... what an idiot.
Now you've done it... Photos of old crufty books incoming!
Dude. Then explain this message if Apple doesn't _require_ periodic login: >> <https://i.postimg.cc/nrFHSvby/appleid11.jpg>
what part of 'sign in again' is not clear?
nothing has been disabled.
if it had, you wouldn't have been able to get anywhere near that far.
enter your apple id (likely autofilled) and the password, and it will
update whatever it needs to update.
One nice thing for hex coding was that the memory order made sense
(compared to that of the Intel MPUs).
yet you don't know the proper terminology, known as little-endian and big-endian, and you also don't know that the power pc supported both.
I wrote assembly code, nospam, for both the IBM (oh, what was it... 1130?... that was a loooong time ago, actually, I think it was the 1130 and then the 370 which was a much bigger machine -
but anyway - of course I know about
little endian and big endian memory addressing).
Hell... I even have the assembly language books to prove it! :)
The point on that iPad is that Apple _requires_ periodic sign in, nospam.
The iPad is a toy that I simply use to learn on.
Still rocking my 1st gen iPad, iPhone 4, and so on here. Arlen's a
clueless idiot who locks himself out of his own devices just so he can
turn around and troll the Apple newsgroups with bullshit fabricated
stories.
Try learning to read
take your own advice.
you are mindlessly blaming apple for the actions of ad tracking
companies, who ignored the user's choice to not be tracked and tracked
them anyway.
And from the news TODAY:
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2022/04/a-year-after-apple-enforces-app-tracking-policy-covert-ios-tracking-remains/
Jolly Roger wrote:
Still rocking my 1st gen iPad, iPhone 4, and so on here. Arlen's a
clueless idiot who locks himself out of his own devices just so he can
turn around and troll the Apple newsgroups with bullshit fabricated
stories.
The fact remains that I tested what you low-IQ morons denied for years. <https://i.postimg.cc/LXzB3Lc0/appleid01.jpg>
Apple requires you to periodically sign into the mothership; Google can't. <https://i.postimg.cc/nrFHSvby/appleid11.jpg>
The reason you low-IQ iKooks deny these facts is because you _hate_ them.
The fact that you can't make an iOS browser private
it's private by design.
fm radio is almost never used on a phone for a number of reasons,
smartphone apps can receive many hundreds if not thousands of fm radio stations from anywhere in the world, along with many other sources, and without the need to use headphones.
Since no iPhone ever had FM radio...
Really?
really. nor do almost all android phones as well as feature phones.
it's not something that is in any demand, let alone high demand.
really. nor do almost all android phones as well as feature phones.
it's not something that is in any demand, let alone high demand.
Bullshit
Go away
the opposite, where there's cellular service but little to no
terrestrial radio, is far more common, especially in the obscure places
you keep citing about verizon's supposedly fantastic coverage.
I just tried my Galaxy A5,and that worked as an FM radio (with data and
WiFi turned off). Not brilliant, but better than nothing. The
earphone/mic lead also acts as the aerial.
And while a good many phones do have FM as a feature, I would be a lot
of money that most people never use it or are even aware of it.
Do they? I couldn't find a single example
There's an Android OTG USB-C adapter for receiving ATSC digital TV
broadcasts on Android phones and tablets. See <https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07GPB6VFX>. It comes with two antennas.
adb devicesBoth commands are in this zip file <https://github.com/Genymobile/scrcpy>
scrcpy
adb connect 192.168.0.2:5555Where the "192.168.0.2" is the IP address of your phone on your LAN.
scrcpy
scrcpy --record foo.mp4
scrcpy -r bar.mkv
The point on that iPad is that Apple _requires_ periodic sign in, nospam.
it does not.
bullshit. you can't even get android sample code working and you expect people to believe you wrote assembly?
but anyway - of course I know about
little endian and big endian memory addressing).
then why didn't you use the correct terminology?
Hell... I even have the assembly language books to prove it! :)
of course you do, and along with the book on vacuum tubes, you were
able to write software for a vacuum tube computer.
The fact remains that I tested what you low-IQ morons denied for years.
<https://i.postimg.cc/LXzB3Lc0/appleid01.jpg>
Arlen desperately wants you to ignore the "Not Now" button in the above screenshot - just like he wants you to think that clicking that button
will supposedly result in your device suddenly bricking itself for no
reason. He's such a lazy troll. : )
Apple requires you to periodically sign into the mothership; Google can't. >> <https://i.postimg.cc/nrFHSvby/appleid11.jpg>
Arlen desperately wants you to ignore the fact that he had to dig deep
down into Settings to find that message - a message he could ignore if
he wanted to, but doesn't, because: troll. He's a lazy, old fool. ; )
The reason you low-IQ iKooks deny these facts is because you _hate_ them.
Notice how he hasn't stated a single fact in this thread. All Arlen has
are shitty opinions and lame insults. ; )
On 2022-04-20, Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
Jolly Roger wrote:
Still rocking my 1st gen iPad, iPhone 4, and so on here. Arlen's a
clueless idiot who locks himself out of his own devices just so he can
turn around and troll the Apple newsgroups with bullshit fabricated
stories.
The fact remains that I tested what you low-IQ morons denied for years.
<https://i.postimg.cc/LXzB3Lc0/appleid01.jpg>
Arlen desperately wants you to ignore the "Not Now" button in the above screenshot - just like he wants you to think that clicking that button
will supposedly result in your device suddenly bricking itself for no
reason. He's such a lazy troll. : )
Apple requires you to periodically sign into the mothership; Google can't. >> <https://i.postimg.cc/nrFHSvby/appleid11.jpg>
Arlen desperately wants you to ignore the fact that he had to dig deep
down into Settings to find that message - a message he could ignore if
he wanted to, but doesn't, because: troll. He's a lazy, old fool. ; )
The reason you low-IQ iKooks deny these facts is because you _hate_ them.
Notice how he hasn't stated a single fact in this thread. All Arlen has
are shitty opinions and lame insults. ; )
the primary reason was to encourage the purchase of AirPods.
that is absolutely false.
Especially considering Apple included a set of Lightning headphones in
the box at the time. : )
*and* they included a lightning adapter.
it's hard to encourage buying something new when *two* solutions are
provided in the box.
It's a red herring to discuss the pros and cons since the reason
Apple removed the industry standard 3.5 mm jack was to make you buy
it back.
Incorrect.
Yes, he is incorrect. the primary reason was to encourage the purchase
of AirPods.
Just because you say so? Nah. No sale, sorry.
Well, maybe so, but he's always good for a laff.
Notice how he hasn't stated a single fact in this thread.
Has the shitbag ever stated a single fact in any thread?
Its not 'as if', it *is*.
We all know these sorts of people. They dint know how to verify any
knowledge for themselves so their validation consists in choosing who to believe.
My dear sister even said that 'well it depends which websites you believe'
As she assured me that German government was lying about its own nuclear power but was telling the exact truth about Chernobyl, that it was going
to kill 1/4 million people. And cover it up. Somehow.
Its called doublethink.
I call these people in general ArtSuidents™ because what is important to them is the emotional and moral tenor of their lives. They buy Apple
tech and German cars, because it makes them feel superior and good
about themselves. Another habit they have was vest describe by Rudyard Kipling - and acute psychologist - in 'the Jungle Book'.
"We are the greatest and the wisest people in the jungle...what we think
to day the world will think tomorrow ... we all say it, so it must be true!"
Bandar Log. The monkey people.
They are not stupid people, they are that most dangerous of species,
people who are a bit smart, but think they are a lot smarter than they
are, and as smart as anybody else.
But they are intellectually lazy: the short cut of simply receiving
someone else's wisdom instead of the hard work of acquiring some
themselves, is simply too tempting
In a political context they are called 'useful idiots' : they will latch
on to any 'new' idea and support it with fervour simply in order to be
as they see it 'ahead of the game'.
Marketing to this group consists in generating an emotional narrative
about the product that presents it in the light of being 'new,
promising, and full of hope - the obvious choice of an intelligent
person', Rather than 'true, useful, tried and tested'
Or as the Daily Mash put it 'clever science man say new shiny thing make everything better'
Whenever you detect a potential emotional bias to a narrative, the implication that those not 'with it' are incurable Neanderthals, an/or research that implies that '97% of everybody who counts believes in it'
you may be sure its snake oil...
Hank Rogers wrote:
Well, maybe so, but he's always good for a laff.
I'm going to give you one more of these kindergarten no-content
completely
childish always non technical responses before I plonk you "Hank
Rogers".
One more. And then plonk. No warning. Just plonk.
If you can't ever contribute as an adult to the actual topic, then
plonking
you _improves_ the value of the conversation here on this newsgroup.
One more. Then plonk.
Lewis wrote:
Has the shitbag ever stated a single fact in any thread?
Before I said the iKooks in this thread were:
a. Alan Baker (everyone has him plonked as he cannot add value)
b. nospam (most people keep him as he "can" add value
c. Jolly Roger (filled with kindergarten hateful vitriol)
And now, we have Jolly Roger's twin in kindergarten hate-filled
vitriol:
d. Lewis
For those who don't know, Lewis & Jolly Roger _hate_ every fact
about Apple
because the facts _hurt_ them deeply since they _believe_
everything Apple
told them.
I liken both of them to the fifth grade bully who was held back a
few years,
when someone who is years younger in the same grade tells him Santa
isn't
real.
Lewis: Santa exists. He's gonna give me an iPhone for Christmas.
Child: That's just a marketing gimmick. Your parents are Santa.
Lewis. No. I hate you! He exists! I saw him on an Apple
advertisement.
Child: That's how marketing works, Lewis. Don't believe Apple ads.
Lewis: Liar! Liar! Pants on fire! Apple said it. It must be true!
What Jolly Roger does is call all facts trolls; and what Lewis does
is call
all people who tell them facts, "shitbags". Just watch.
You can ask _why_ facts are so scary to these people but if you
understand
the Santa analogy, the fact alone _destroys_ their cuddly belief
systems.
They not only hate the facts - but they hate the mere messenger of
facts.
Just watch.
In article <t3n76u$ibl$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
And where do you go that has FM coverage...
...but no cellular data?
You're assuming that everyone has unlimited data with which to stream
radio stations.
you're assuming unlimited data is needed. it's not, largely because
most of the time, people are on wifi.
But actually, depending on the carrier, there are definitely places
where there is FM coverage but no cellular data.
very few.
cellular coverage on highways is *more* common than fm, and if the
audio is sent to the vehicle's sound system, it will be impossible
to hear a difference.
Jolly Roger wrote:
It's a red herring to discuss the pros and cons since the reason
Apple removed the industry standard 3.5 mm jack was to make you buy
it back.
Incorrect.
Yes, he is incorrect. the primary reason was to encourage the purchase
of AirPods.
Just because you say so? Nah. No sale, sorry.
Apple saved 6.5 billion dollars alone, and made many billions more JR.
When you're in a place with Wi-Fi you're also likely at a place with a computer (at work) or a radio with good speakers and a good antenna (at
home or in the car).
The FM radio on smart phones is used in other situations and when you're
not on Wi-Fi, and sometimes when there's no cell coverage.
The point on that iPad is that Apple _requires_ periodic sign in, nospam.
it does not.
Then what's this?
<https://i.postimg.cc/nrFHSvby/appleid11.jpg>
On 2022-04-19, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
In article <t3n76u$ibl$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
And where do you go that has FM coverage...
...but no cellular data?
You're assuming that everyone has unlimited data with which to stream
radio stations.
you're assuming unlimited data is needed. it's not, largely because
most of the time, people are on wifi.
You're assumng there's a nearby hotspot for which they have the
password. At home, you pay your ISP for your own wifi (unless
you're leeching off your neighbour). It's not free - or always
available.
And where do you go that has FM coverage...
...but no cellular data?
You're assuming that everyone has unlimited data with which to stream
radio stations.
you're assuming unlimited data is needed. it's not, largely because
most of the time, people are on wifi.
You're assumng there's a nearby hotspot for which they have the
password. At home, you pay your ISP for your own wifi (unless
you're leeching off your neighbour). It's not free - or always
available.
But actually, depending on the carrier, there are definitely places
where there is FM coverage but no cellular data.
very few.
Not as few as you might think. Two days a week I work at an office
out in the country which has no cell coverage. FM radios work fine
there, though.
cellular coverage on highways is *more* common than fm, and if the
audio is sent to the vehicle's sound system, it will be impossible
to hear a difference.
Depends on where you are. Cell companies take great pains to ensure
good coverage along major highways, even out in the sticks. Go a
few miles on either side and the situation can be very different.
bullshit. you can't even get android sample code working and you expect people to believe you wrote assembly?
You're an idiot. Writing assembly language code is completely different than writing in Java
My assembly language coding was back in the 70's on the 1130/370's and my
hex programming was on the 68701 in the 80's but the one thing I always
hated was programming because I considered coding boring overall. All the languages do the same thing, essentially, using a different syntax, which, when I was young, I thought was neat but now I just think it's a waste of time. I'd rather test the software instead.
On 4/19/2022 10:27 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
On 2022-04-19, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
In article <t3n76u$ibl$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
And where do you go that has FM coverage...
...but no cellular data?
You're assuming that everyone has unlimited data with which to stream
radio stations.
you're assuming unlimited data is needed. it's not, largely because
most of the time, people are on wifi.
You're assumng there's a nearby hotspot for which they have the
password. At home, you pay your ISP for your own wifi (unless
you're leeching off your neighbour). It's not free - or always
available.
nospam is wrong of course™.
When you're in a place with Wi-Fi you're also likely at a place with a computer (at work) or a radio with good speakers and a good antenna (at
home or in the car).
The FM radio on smart phones is used in other situations and when you're
not on Wi-Fi, and sometimes when there's no cell coverage.
In article <t3nrrg$1pes$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:
The point on that iPad is that Apple _requires_ periodic sign in,
nospam.
it does not.
Then what's this? <https://i.postimg.cc/nrFHSvby/appleid11.jpg>
it's irrefutable proof that you're incredibly clueless, among other
things.
In article <sRM7K.191020$yi_7.1486@fx39.iad>, Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
Not as few as you might think. Two days a week I work at an office
out in the country which has no cell coverage. FM radios work fine
there, though.
that's a rare exception. it's anecdotal and not representative of the
rest of the world.
It's a weird business in 2022 that can be located somewhere with no cell coverage.
On 20/04/2022 15:00, Lewis wrote:
It's a weird business in 2022 that can be located somewhere with no cell
coverage.
You would be surprised.
Many industrial sites have either large levels of interference, are
covered in enough metal to prevent external mobile signals penetrating
or are simply in one of the many places where coveragee is patchy at best. Fortunately phones equipped with wifi calling can use the internet to
make calls
Many industrial sites have either large levels of interference, are
covered in enough metal to prevent external mobile signals penetrating
or are simply in one of the many places where coveragee is patchy at best.
Fortunately phones equipped with wifi calling can use the internet to
make calls
In message <200420220907445303%nospam@nospam.invalid> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
In article <sRM7K.191020$yi_7.1486@fx39.iad>, Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
Not as few as you might think. Two days a week I work at an office
out in the country which has no cell coverage. FM radios work fine
there, though.
that's a rare exception. it's anecdotal and not representative of the
rest of the world.
Not only is not representative, it is fucking weird. If your employees
who deal with the outside world are not available on their mobiles, that
is going to hurt your business quite a bit.
I have a good friend who works in logistics. He has an office and
supervises a team of about 25, and about 60% of his calls come in on his
work mobile phone. Why? Because the people he has to deal with are more likely to be able to reach him wherever he is on that number than on the office phone, and no one wants to all two numbers.
It's a weird business in 2022 that can be located somewhere with no cell coverage.
In urban areas it would be rare to not have coverage, though often, even
in urban areas when you're deep inside a big box store you'll lose coverage.
In rural areas there are often businesses with no, or poor, cell
coverage.
I ran into this up in New Hampshire last year. Fortunately the
business had free, albeit slow, Wi-Fi. At hotels and resorts in the
mountains there is often no coverage but they provide Wi-Fi.
Not as few as you might think. Two days a week I work at an office
out in the country which has no cell coverage. FM radios work fine
there, though.
that's a rare exception. it's anecdotal and not representative of the
rest of the world.
I see, my anecdotes don't count but yours do. Sorry, Your Majesty.
On 4/20/2022 7:06 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 20/04/2022 15:00, Lewis wrote:
It's a weird business in 2022 that can be located somewhere with no cell >>> coverage.
You would be surprised.
Many industrial sites have either large levels of interference, are
covered in enough metal to prevent external mobile signals penetrating
or are simply in one of the many places where coveragee is patchy at best. >> Fortunately phones equipped with wifi calling can use the internet to
make calls
Lewis is wrong of course™.
In urban areas it would be rare to not have coverage, though often, even
in urban areas when you're deep inside a big box store you'll lose coverage.
In rural areas there are often businesses with no, or poor, cell
coverage.
Smartphoens will rape your data plan very hard if you depend on streaming services for listening to music or newscasts, hence heavy FM use in areas where
Internet connectivity is not plentyful.
Thinking everybody has an unlimited data plan is very First Worlder but some people still has plans with FUPs that cap at 2 GB and need all of it for important things.
A 2 GB data cap used to listen to 192 kbps MP3s maxes out at about ~
1400 minutes or 23.3 hrs. As most podcasts, news programs, and radio
streams are streamed at 128 kbps or lower (often 64 kbps for
podcasts), you're looking at 34h 43min of content / month. For _video_
a 2 GB data cap is pretty rough, but for audio data really not so.
A 2 GB data cap used to listen to 192 kbps MP3s maxes out at about ~
1400 minutes or 23.3 hrs. As most podcasts, news programs, and radio streams are streamed at 128 kbps or lower (often 64 kbps for
podcasts), you're looking at 34h 43min of content / month. For _video_
a 2 GB data cap is pretty rough, but for audio data really not so.
Even if people used their data plan solely for streaming (which they don't) a 35 h quota will burn down quite quickly if you listen to music for 4 to 6 hours per day.
You would be surprised.
Many industrial sites have either large levels of interference, are
covered in enough metal to prevent external mobile signals penetrating
or are simply in one of the many places where coveragee is patchy at best. Fortunately phones equipped with wifi calling can use the internet to
make calls
nospam is wrong of course™.
The FM radio on smart phones is used in other situations and when you're
not on Wi-Fi, and sometimes when there's no cell coverage.
Charlie Gibbs wrote:
I see, my anecdotes don't count but yours do. Sorry, Your Majesty.
What you're running into is the iKooks own an imaginary belief
system that intimates their beloved product line has the basic
functionality it lacks.
The problem you're seeing is that the iKooks don't own the adult
skills to simply accept that fact.
Like children still believing in Santa Claus well after the fifth
grade, the iKooks are _desperate_ to cling on to their unmet
expectations.
Yet, the fact remains the iPhone lacks even the most basic
functionality that not only almost all phones have, but most phones
still have - such as the sdslot, the 3.5mm jack, the FM radio, the
charger in the box, etc.
iKook: Santa exists. He's gonna give me an iPhone for Christmas.
Adult: No son. That's just a marketing gimmick. Your parents are
Santa.
iKook: No. You're wrong. He exists. I saw him on an Apple
advertisement.
Adult: That's how marketing works, son. Apple wants you to think
that.
iKook: Liar! Liar! Pants on fire! I hate you. You're wrong!
you're assuming unlimited data is needed. it's not, largely because
most of the time, people are on wifi.
You're assumng there's a nearby hotspot for which they have the
password.
I see, my anecdotes don't count but yours do. Sorry, Your Majesty.
Lewis is wrong of course.
In urban areas it would be rare to not have coverage, though often, even
in urban areas when you're deep inside a big box store you'll lose coverage.
the number of people for whom there is cellular/wifi but no fm is
greater than the number of people for whom there is fm but no
cellular/wifi.
except that's not what you said yesterday.
according to *you*, 'all the languages do the same thing, essentially,
using a different syntax'.
The point on that iPad is that Apple _requires_ periodic sign in, nospam. >>>it does not.
Then what's this?
<https://i.postimg.cc/nrFHSvby/appleid11.jpg>
it's irrefutable proof that you're incredibly clueless, among other
things.
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
You would be surprised.
Many industrial sites have either large levels of interference, are
covered in enough metal to prevent external mobile signals penetrating
or are simply in one of the many places where coveragee is patchy at
best.
Fortunately phones equipped with wifi calling can use the internet to
make calls
What you're running into is the iKooks (Lewis, nospam, Jolly Roger, Alan Baker, et. al) are always making _excuses_ for why the iPhone lacks basic functionality that is (and always has been) in _most_ phones out there.
What they _hate_ is the basic functionality isn't in their beloved iPhone.
What you're running into is the iKooks own an imaginary belief system
that intimates their beloved product line has the basic functionality it lacks.
nospam wrote:
except that's not what you said yesterday.
according to *you*, 'all the languages do the same thing, essentially,
using a different syntax'.
Jesus Chris. You _are_ still an idiot, nospam.
Whether it's Fortran or Assembly Language or Java or Cotlin or whatever,
they all do the same things with a different syntax.
Your claim that you can't do with Assembly Language what you can with, oh, say, Swift, just shows how ignorant you are when it comes to coding,
nospam.
As always, you iKooks have the confluence of three traits:
a. Your self esteem is tied up with defending everything Apple does
b. Your IQ is substandard
c. Hence your education and knowledge level is also substandard.
If you can do something in, oh, say, Swift, that can't be done in Assembly Language, then tell us what that is, nospam.
Tell us one thing Swift can do that an Assembly Language program can't do. Name just one.
nospam wrote:
The point on that iPad is that Apple _requires_ periodic sign in,
nospam.
it does not.
Then what's this?
<https://i.postimg.cc/nrFHSvby/appleid11.jpg>
it's irrefutable proof that you're incredibly clueless, among other
things.
No. It's irrefutable proof that you _hate_ that you can't deny the fact.
Apple periodically requires you to log into the mothership; Google can't. <https://i.postimg.cc/nrFHSvby/appleid11.jpg>
You clearly _hate_ that fact.
But the fact you hate facts about Apple products doesn't change the facts.
On 21/04/2022 19:22, Andy Burnelli wrote:
What you're running into is the iKooks own an imaginary belief system
that intimates their beloved product line has the basic functionality
it lacks.
Apple is simply great, therefore anything that Apple does has to be the
best thing and for good reason..
Substitute God for Apple, and its just a standard religious mind set.
Apple is simply great, therefore anything that Apple does has to be the
best thing and for good reason..
Substitute God for Apple, and its just a standard religious mind set.
Jesus Chris. You _are_ still an idiot, nospam.
Whether it's Fortran or Assembly Language or Java or Cotlin or whatever,
they all do the same things with a different syntax.
In the end it is all just bits, in silicon
Tell us one thing Swift can do that an Assembly Language program can't do. >> Name just one.
Catch insects at 50 mph on the wing?
If you can do something in, oh, say, Swift, that can't be done in Assembly Language, then tell us what that is, nospam.
On Thu, 21 Apr 2022 22:08:06 +0100
Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
If you can do something in, oh, say, Swift, that can't be done in Assembly >> Language, then tell us what that is, nospam.
I don't know Swift - but one thing that can be done in high level languages that cannot be done in assembler is create large, portable, maintainable pieces of software, even OS kernels are mostly too large and complex to be written in assembler and have been for decades.
Whether it's Fortran or Assembly Language or Java or Cotlin or whatever,
they all do the same things with a different syntax.
If you can do something in, oh, say, Swift, that can't be done in Assembly Language, then tell us what that is, nospam.
Tell us one thing Swift can do that an Assembly Language program can't do. Name just one.
They even ridiculed the concept of writing in hex, where, if anyone has _ever_ programmed EPROMs like I have, you get good at rote hex coding.
In article <t3tmec$g9c$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:
They even ridiculed the concept of writing in hex, where, if anyone has _ever_ programmed EPROMs like I have, you get good at rote hex coding.
one does not 'code in hex' and eproms are not programmed. they are for
On 22/04/2022 08:32, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
On Thu, 21 Apr 2022 22:08:06 +0100
Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
If you can do something in, oh, say, Swift, that can't be done in
Assembly Language, then tell us what that is, nospam.
I don't know Swift - but one thing that can be done in high
level languages that cannot be done in assembler is create large,
portable, maintainable pieces of software, even OS kernels are mostly
too large and complex to be written in assembler and have been for
decades.
Well yes and no.
You would be surprised at how many "#ifdef X86" a linux kernel probably
has. And how many compiler optimisations may need to be tweaked to port software between different targets.
They even ridiculed the concept of writing in hex, where, if anyone has _ever_ programmed EPROMs like I have, you get good at rote hex coding.
one does not 'code in hex' and eproms are not programmed. they are for
I hate to disillusion you but when I was putting my code into
eproms the device we used to do so was called an "Eprom Programmer" so programming an eprom is pretty reasonable terminology that wasn't uncommon
in those circles circa 1980.
Personally I usually talked about burning or
blowing an eprom.
Furthermore I have written code in assembler, hand assembled it and
typed the resulting hex directly into an eprom programmer because I hadn't yet written the assembler (well actually tables for the table driven assembler/disassembler I'd written) for that processor and needed the eprom for testing. I have also patched eproms with directly typed hex without bothering to assemble the corrected source for a couple of bytes change.
It's been a *long* time since I've done any of those things.
In article <t3tmec$g9c$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:
They even ridiculed the concept of writing in hex, where, if anyone has
_ever_ programmed EPROMs like I have, you get good at rote hex coding.
one does not 'code in hex' and eproms are not programmed. they are for storing data, and unlike regular proms, can be erased and rewritten if there are any changes.
you're not fooling anyone.
Proms & Eproms are programmed, that is what the 'p' Stands for
you do it with an (e)prom programmer.
the data to program (or 'Burn' as it was commonly called) could either be uploaded to the programmer via a serial cable or manualy entered via a hex keypad. Many earlier experimenters assembled their code by hand & used
this approach.
In article <t3tmec$g9c$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:
They even ridiculed the concept of writing in hex, where, if anyone has
_ever_ programmed EPROMs like I have, you get good at rote hex coding.
one does not 'code in hex' and eproms are not programmed. they are for storing data, and unlike regular proms, can be erased and rewritten if
there are any changes.
you're not fooling anyone.
On Fri, 22 Apr 2022 07:56:52 -0400, nospam wrote:
In article <t3tmec$g9c$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:
They even ridiculed the concept of writing in hex, where, if anyone has
_ever_ programmed EPROMs like I have, you get good at rote hex coding.
one does not 'code in hex' and eproms are not programmed. they are for
storing data, and unlike regular proms, can be erased and rewritten if
there are any changes.
you're not fooling anyone.
Proms & Eproms are programmed, that is what the 'p' Stands for
you do it with an (e)prom programmer.
the data to program (or 'Burn' as it was commonly called) could either be uploaded to the programmer via a serial cable or manualy entered via a hex keypad. Many earlier experimenters assembled their code by hand & used
this approach.
There were PROMs, EPROMs (erasable with UV lights) and EEPROMs,
(electrically erasable PROMS). You programmed all of them.
On Fri, 22 Apr 2022 07:56:52 -0400
nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
In article <t3tmec$g9c$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:
They even ridiculed the concept of writing in hex, where, if anyone has
_ever_ programmed EPROMs like I have, you get good at rote hex coding.
one does not 'code in hex' and eproms are not programmed. they are for
I hate to disillusion you but when I was putting my code into
eproms the device we used to do so was called an "Eprom Programmer" so programming an eprom is pretty reasonable terminology that wasn't uncommon
in those circles circa 1980. Personally I usually talked about burning or blowing an eprom.
one does not 'code in hex'
and eproms are not programmed. they are for storing data
one does not 'code in hex'
O RLY? Try telling that to Steve Wozniak, who didn't have access to an assembler when he created the Apple I's firmware.
and eproms are not programmed. they are for storing data
...and the process by which data is stored in an EPROM is called what? The device that does it is called what?
I don't know Swift - but one thing that can be done in high level languages that cannot be done in assembler is create large, portable, maintainable pieces of software, even OS kernels are mostly too large and complex to be written in assembler and have been for decades.
They even ridiculed the concept of writing in hex, where, if anyone has
_ever_ programmed EPROMs like I have, you get good at rote hex coding.
one does not 'code in hex' and eproms are not programmed. they are for
I hate to disillusion you but when I was putting my code into
eproms the device we used to do so was called an "Eprom Programmer" so programming an eprom is pretty reasonable terminology that wasn't uncommon
in those circles circa 1980. Personally I usually talked about burning or blowing an eprom.
Furthermore I have written code in assembler, hand assembled it and typed the resulting hex directly into an eprom programmer because I hadn't yet written the assembler (well actually tables for the table driven assembler/disassembler I'd written) for that processor and needed the eprom for testing. I have also patched eproms with directly typed hex without bothering to assemble the corrected source for a couple of bytes change.
It's been a *long* time since I've done any of those things.
Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
They even ridiculed the concept of writing in hex, where, if anyone has >>>> _ever_ programmed EPROMs like I have, you get good at rote hex coding.
one does not 'code in hex' and eproms are not programmed. they are for
I hate to disillusion you but when I was putting my code into
eproms the device we used to do so was called an "Eprom Programmer" so
programming an eprom is pretty reasonable terminology that wasn't
uncommon
in those circles circa 1980. Personally I usually talked about burning or
blowing an eprom.
Furthermore I have written code in assembler, hand assembled it and >> typed the resulting hex directly into an eprom programmer because I
hadn't
yet written the assembler (well actually tables for the table driven
assembler/disassembler I'd written) for that processor and needed the
eprom
for testing. I have also patched eproms with directly typed hex without
bothering to assemble the corrected source for a couple of bytes change.
It's been a *long* time since I've done any of those things.
I just went into the basement to search for my old 68701 MPU wire-wrapped board, but I haven't found it - although here are some of my "parts" bins. <https://i.postimg.cc/j2pJbkpw/parts01.jpg> Parts bins everyone had
Resistors, diodes, caps, xtors, bridges, 7400 TTL ICs, fuses, pots, etc.
To Ahem A Rivet's astute observations and recollection of his
experience, if
I can find my old hand-twisted wire-wrapped 68701 circuits from the 80s,
I'll post a picture since my credibility is my greatest asset.
Again, if I can find the old board I wire wrapped, I'll snap a photo.
BTW, did you also have a set of well-stocked parts bins like I do?
it's not 1980 anymore, and he's using the term to mean writing
software, not writing to an eprom.
but even if he is using it to mean writing to an eprom, it would be
*less* relevant, since anyone can press a few buttons to do it.
Personally I usually talked about burning or
blowing an eprom.
as did everyone who actually did it, including myself.
Furthermore I have written code in assembler, hand assembled it and
typed the resulting hex directly into an eprom programmer because I hadn't >> yet written the assembler (well actually tables for the table driven
assembler/disassembler I'd written) for that processor and needed the eprom >> for testing. I have also patched eproms with directly typed hex without
bothering to assemble the corrected source for a couple of bytes change.
changing a couple of bytes is not anywhere close to 'coding in hex'.
It's been a *long* time since I've done any of those things.
exactly the point.
some people did that 40 years ago, including myself.
almost nobody does that now, nor do they program in assembly.
with very rare exception, compilers can do a *much* better job at
writing assembly than humans can, particularly with modern processors.
There were PROMs, EPROMs (erasable with UV lights) and EEPROMs,
(electrically erasable PROMS). You programmed all of them.
context matters.
arlen was babbling about programming in assembly versus high level
languages.
Again, if I can find the old board I wire wrapped, I'll snap a photo.
be sure to pose it with some textbooks.
BTW, did you also have a set of well-stocked parts bins like I do?
not anymore, although i might still have the wire wrap gun. that was a
cool device.
now i have a bunch of raspberry pis, various hats and a bunch of micro
sd cards.
It's a basic marketing principle, pushed by marketroids (and adopted as
an article of faith by J. Random Luser) since long before Apple existed:
"If we don't have it, you don't need it."
sms wrote:
Lewis is wrong of course.
The folks on the c.s.r.p group may not be familiar with the iKooks, where
all the iKooks have the _same_ response in _any_ topic that purports to mention the lack of basic functionality of their beloved product line.
In this case, it's FM radio - where they claim that it exists in another form, and that nobody wants it anyway, and that most phones don't have it, etc., all of which are always wrong since most phones _do_ have it.
Just not iPhones.
In article <t3uth2$1361$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:
Again, if I can find the old board I wire wrapped, I'll snap a photo.
be sure to pose it with some textbooks.
BTW, did you also have a set of well-stocked parts bins like I do?
not anymore, although i might still have the wire wrap gun. that was a
cool device.
now i have a bunch of raspberry pis, various hats and a bunch of micro
sd cards.
nospam wrote:
Again, if I can find the old board I wire wrapped, I'll snap a photo.
be sure to pose it with some textbooks.
The fact you completely lack education is why you deprecate textbooks.
BTW, did you also have a set of well-stocked parts bins like I do?
not anymore, although i might still have the wire wrap gun. that was a
cool device.
I doubt you have one nospam since you brazenly fabricate everything.
Let's see a picture of that wire-wrap gun, nospam, next to your iPhone.
Since my credibility is an asset, here's my _hand_ wire-wrap tool. <https://i.postimg.cc/6QkQrDBb/parts03.jpg>
And yes, you know that's my iPad since it's asking me to log in again: <https://i.postimg.cc/zDMxn7hb/parts02.jpg>
BTW, you deprecated my vacuum-tube experience, but do you have _any_ idea what that I/F injection tool is used for nospam?
I didn't think so.
You _fabricated_ everything you claimed, nospam.
Every word from you is a brazen fabrication which you _never_ back up.
now i have a bunch of raspberry pis, various hats and a bunch of micro
sd cards.
I don't believe a word you say nospam because you fabricate everything.
BTW, here's _my_ rasperry pi and the transducers to go along with it. <https://i.postimg.cc/zfbhdcxg/pi02.jpg> Pi and associated transducers
And to prove it's mine, here's a shot of it next to my iPad. <https://i.postimg.cc/CKFCmNWC/pi01.jpg> Raspberry Pi and associated parts
The difference between you and me is I don't fabricate my education.
You do.
Let's see a _single_ shot of your proof nospam.
Show us just one!
now i have a bunch of raspberry pis, various hats and a bunch of micro
sd cards.
...but no old, crufty books? No sale!
On 2022-04-22, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
In article <t3uth2$1361$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:
Again, if I can find the old board I wire wrapped, I'll snap a photo.
be sure to pose it with some textbooks.
BTW, did you also have a set of well-stocked parts bins like I do?
not anymore, although i might still have the wire wrap gun. that was a
cool device.
now i have a bunch of raspberry pis, various hats and a bunch of micro
sd cards.
...but no old, crufty books? No sale!
I remember an EPROM programmer box, about the size of a dictionary in those days which was, whitish, cream colored, as I recall, with a really nice ZIF socket and a spring-loaded lever and a keypad (as I recall) as you noted.
the data to program (or 'Burn' as it was commonly called) could either be
uploaded to the programmer via a serial cable or manualy entered via a hex >> keypad. Many earlier experimenters assembled their code by hand & used
this approach.
they did do that long ago, as did i. certainly not now.
They even ridiculed the concept of writing in hex, where, if anyone has
_ever_ programmed EPROMs like I have, you get good at rote hex coding.
one does not 'code in hex' and eproms are not programmed. they are for
storing data, and unlike regular proms, can be erased and rewritten if
there are any changes.
you're not fooling anyone.
Proms & Eproms are programmed, that is what the 'p' Stands for
you do it with an (e)prom programmer.
the data to program (or 'Burn' as it was commonly called) could either be uploaded to the programmer via a serial cable or manualy entered via a hex keypad. Many earlier experimenters assembled their code by hand & used
this approach.
Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
They even ridiculed the concept of writing in hex, where, if
anyone has
_ever_ programmed EPROMs like I have, you get good at rote hex
coding.
one does not 'code in hex' and eproms are not programmed. they
are for
I hate to disillusion you but when I was putting my code into
eproms the device we used to do so was called an "Eprom
Programmer" so
programming an eprom is pretty reasonable terminology that wasn't
uncommon
in those circles circa 1980. Personally I usually talked about
burning or
blowing an eprom.
Furthermore I have written code in assembler, hand assembled
it and
typed the resulting hex directly into an eprom programmer because
I hadn't
yet written the assembler (well actually tables for the table driven
assembler/disassembler I'd written) for that processor and needed
the eprom
for testing. I have also patched eproms with directly typed hex
without
bothering to assemble the corrected source for a couple of bytes
change.
It's been a *long* time since I've done any of those things.
I just went into the basement to search for my old 68701 MPU
wire-wrapped
board, but I haven't found it - although here are some of my
"parts" bins.
<https://i.postimg.cc/j2pJbkpw/parts01.jpg> Parts bins everyone had
Resistors, diodes, caps, xtors, bridges, 7400 TTL ICs, fuses, pots,
etc.
To Ahem A Rivet's astute observations and recollection of his
experience, if
I can find my old hand-twisted wire-wrapped 68701 circuits from the
80s,
I'll post a picture since my credibility is my greatest asset.
As I recall, I would read the SAMS guides (from Radio Shack?) for the Motorola 68701, which has an onboard EEPROM, and then I'd write the
code by
hand, generally resorting to hex (as you did) simply because of
_how_ it's
programmed into the 68701.
I'd pop the 40-pin MPU out of the ZIF socket of the wire-wrapped
board and
then I'd place it into the EEPROM programmer which would burn it in.
You had to eventually feed it the hex code so you learned that a
LDA (load
accumulator A) was a certain hex code and _that_ is what you wrote
your
programs in (since you had to do the translation to hex anyway).
It appears this nospam, who, let's be clear, has a low IQ and no
education,
doesn't realize that's how it was done with EEPROMS in the olden days.
Again, if I can find the old board I wire wrapped, I'll snap a photo.
BTW, did you also have a set of well-stocked parts bins like I do?
BTW, did you also have a set of well-stocked parts bins like I do?
not anymore, although i might still have the wire wrap gun. that was a
cool device.
I doubt you have one nospam since you brazenly fabricate everything.
Let's see a picture of that wire-wrap gun, nospam, next to your iPhone.
Since my credibility is an asset, here's my _hand_ wire-wrap tool.
<https://i.postimg.cc/6QkQrDBb/parts03.jpg>
BTW, you deprecated my vacuum-tube experience, but do you have _any_ idea what that I/F injection tool is used for nospam?
On 2022-04-22 11:52 a.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
They even ridiculed the concept of writing in hex, where, if
anyone has
_ever_ programmed EPROMs like I have, you get good at rote hex
coding.
one does not 'code in hex' and eproms are not programmed. they
are for
I hate to disillusion you but when I was putting my code
into
eproms the device we used to do so was called an "Eprom
Programmer" so
programming an eprom is pretty reasonable terminology that
wasn't uncommon
in those circles circa 1980. Personally I usually talked about
burning or
blowing an eprom.
Furthermore I have written code in assembler, hand
assembled it and
typed the resulting hex directly into an eprom programmer
because I hadn't
yet written the assembler (well actually tables for the table
driven
assembler/disassembler I'd written) for that processor and
needed the eprom
for testing. I have also patched eproms with directly typed hex
without
bothering to assemble the corrected source for a couple of bytes
change.
It's been a *long* time since I've done any of those things.
I just went into the basement to search for my old 68701 MPU
wire-wrapped
board, but I haven't found it - although here are some of my
"parts" bins.
<https://i.postimg.cc/j2pJbkpw/parts01.jpg> Parts bins everyone had
Resistors, diodes, caps, xtors, bridges, 7400 TTL ICs, fuses,
pots, etc.
Oh, my!
To Ahem A Rivet's astute observations and recollection of his
experience, if
I can find my old hand-twisted wire-wrapped 68701 circuits from
the 80s,
I'll post a picture since my credibility is my greatest asset.
Then you, sir...
...are broke.
It's clear that it's you, nospam, who has never designed microcontroller boards, where in the 80's, that's what I did, and I used these parts then:
<https://i.postimg.cc/j2pJbkpw/parts01.jpg> Parts bins everyone had
Some _books_ I used to learn about design of microcontrollers are thus.
<https://i.postimg.cc/s2SGzC8H/books07.jpg> Biomedical instrument design
You did _everything_ by hand in those days, including hex coding.
Furthermore I have written code in assembler, hand assembled it and
typed the resulting hex directly into an eprom programmer because I hadn't >> yet written the assembler (well actually tables for the table driven
assembler/disassembler I'd written) for that processor and needed the eprom
for testing. I have also patched eproms with directly typed hex without >> bothering to assemble the corrected source for a couple of bytes change.
changing a couple of bytes is not anywhere close to 'coding in hex'.
You're an idiot, nospam.
In those days, you wrote the _entire_ program in hex.
with very rare exception, compilers can do a *much* better job at
writing assembly than humans can, particularly with modern processors.
One of my best friends made zillions in the early days of Google, writing compilers, and he claims that his compiled results are more efficient than hand coding - where the guy is a genius (unlike you, nospam), so it may very well be the case.
i definitely have one. it's in a box somewhere in storage and i'm not
going to bother digging it out for a troll.
Since my credibility is an asset, here's my _hand_ wire-wrap tool.
<https://i.postimg.cc/6QkQrDBb/parts03.jpg>
i had one of those too.
eventually, i got a wire wrap gun, which was a lot more fun.
BTW, you deprecated my vacuum-tube experience, but do you have _any_ idea
what that I/F injection tool is used for nospam?
yes.
It's clear that it's you, nospam, who has never designed microcontroller
boards, where in the 80's, that's what I did, and I used these parts then:
oh yes i did, as well as ttl/cmos before microcontrollers were common.
<https://i.postimg.cc/j2pJbkpw/parts01.jpg> Parts bins everyone had
no, not everyone.
Some _books_ I used to learn about design of microcontrollers are thus.
<https://i.postimg.cc/s2SGzC8H/books07.jpg> Biomedical instrument design
biomedical instrument design is the best way to learn about hex coding
and microprocessors.
in fact, medical certification requires the firmware to be written
entirely in hex.
You did _everything_ by hand in those days, including hex coding.
yep, i sure did, even feeding paper tape or punched cards into the
reader and sometimes toggling in instructions on a front panel.
except that was a long time ago and no longer relevant.
You're an idiot, nospam.
In those days, you wrote the _entire_ program in hex.
no, you wrote it in assembly and then converted it to hex, sometimes by
hand.
things are different now.
with very rare exception, compilers will produce better optimized code
than what humans can do, especially on modern processors, for reasons
well beyond your level of understanding.
What I would do is design a circuit and then hunt around for the right cap
or resistor or transistor, and, if I had it, then great. If not, I would change the circuit since going to radio shack was always a hit or miss.
You, on the other hand, have _never_ designed a circuit in your entire life.
Unlike you, nospam, I did use punched tape and punched cards and also unlike you, I toggled the boot address at the bottom of the PDP 11, which, I'm sure you're completely unaware, many research institutes used as their computers.
nospam wrote:
What I would do is design a circuit and then hunt around for the
right cap
or resistor or transistor, and, if I had it, then great. If not, I would >>> change the circuit since going to radio shack was always a hit or miss.
radio shack charged ridiculous prices for parts.
We bought the Kodak sensors to make parking alarms way back then.
The price seemed reasonable at the time.
Same with the speech synthesizer ICs that we bought from Radio Shack.
I think I got all my SAMs books there too (although I don't recall).
it was only useful if you needed something *now*.
My parts bin still has some of those Radio Shack parts. <https://i.postimg.cc/D0mcbKNS/parts04.jpg> Radio Shack spare parts
What I would do is design a circuit and then hunt around for the right cap >> or resistor or transistor, and, if I had it, then great. If not, I would
change the circuit since going to radio shack was always a hit or miss.
radio shack charged ridiculous prices for parts.
it was only useful if you needed something *now*.
otherwise, mail order.
You, on the other hand, have _never_ designed a circuit in your entire life.
oh yes i have. many of them, but that was several lifetimes ago.
Unlike you, nospam, I did use punched tape and punched cards and also unlike >> you, I toggled the boot address at the bottom of the PDP 11, which, I'm sure >> you're completely unaware, many research institutes used as their computers.
actually, i used a pdp-8, which was *octal*.
the hex coding came later.
and since this is crossposted to r-pi, to keep it on topic, right next
to me is an rpi with pidp on it.
<https://github.com/tangentsoft/pidp8i>
Jolly Roger wrote:
now i have a bunch of raspberry pis, various hats and a bunch of
micro sd cards.
...but no old, crufty books? No sale!
None of the iKooks has _any_ education
My parts bin still has some of those Radio Shack parts. <https://i.postimg.cc/D0mcbKNS/parts04.jpg> Radio Shack spare parts
Nicely illustrating how ridiculous Radio Shack's prices were.
Your "ERZC14DK201U" varistor is still available today...
...for $1.00...
...for a package of 2.
You paid $1.59 for one what must be conservatively estimated as at least
30 years ago. Checking the CPI for inflation from 1992 until now, you
paid more than 6 times as much as you should have.
My parts bin still has some of those Radio Shack parts.
<https://i.postimg.cc/D0mcbKNS/parts04.jpg> Radio Shack spare parts
otherwise, mail order.
I don't remember ever doing mail order for basic TTL ICs, but maybe.
I'd buy the Forest Mims' series and make circuits like with the 555 timer.
You've never told the truth in your life so why would I believe you now?
At least I own a raspi (although it was given to me for free long ago).
In article <t3vb08$9jj$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:
My parts bin still has some of those Radio Shack parts.
<https://i.postimg.cc/D0mcbKNS/parts04.jpg> Radio Shack spare parts
those look like they're from the 1970s. why are they still unopened?
otherwise, mail order.
I don't remember ever doing mail order for basic TTL ICs, but maybe.
i did.
the back pages of popular electronics, radio electronics and similar magazines had numerous ads, including polypaks, james, olson,
lafayette, plus heathkit for entire kits.
<https://live.staticflickr.com/4009/4455981283_26760272eb_k.jpg> <https://live.staticflickr.com/2778/4455979995_b11b12c8c6_k.jpg>
I'd buy the Forest Mims' series and make circuits like with the 555 timer.
the 555 was an incredibly useful chip.
You've never told the truth in your life so why would I believe you now?
why would anyone believe someone who changes his nym more often than
his underwear?
At least I own a raspi (although it was given to me for free long ago).
only one? i have a bag full of them. they're cheap.
unfortunately, they're very backordered, with estimates that it will
resolve sometime in 2023, causing the prices on ebay to be ridiculously
high.
fortunately, i have a bunch which should last through the drought.
In article <t3vc25$17i$1@dont-email.me>, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
My parts bin still has some of those Radio Shack parts.
<https://i.postimg.cc/D0mcbKNS/parts04.jpg> Radio Shack spare parts
Nicely illustrating how ridiculous Radio Shack's prices were.
Your "ERZC14DK201U" varistor is still available today...
...for $1.00...
...for a package of 2.
You paid $1.59 for one what must be conservatively estimated as at least
30 years ago. Checking the CPI for inflation from 1992 until now, you
paid more than 6 times as much as you should have.
the 1970s is a more likely estimate.
using 1975 for the middle of the decade, $1.59 then would be $8.50 now.
a bigger question is why does he have 50 year old parts in unopened packaging?
Therefore I am a bit defensive with this subject.
A 2 GB data cap used to listen to 192 kbps MP3s maxes out at about ~
1400 minutes or 23.3 hrs. As most podcasts, news programs, and radio streams are streamed at 128 kbps or lower (often 64 kbps for
podcasts), you're looking at 34h 43min of content / month. For _video_
a 2 GB data cap is pretty rough, but for audio data really not so.
Even if people used their data plan solely for streaming (which they don't) a 35 h quota will burn down quite quickly if you listen to music for 4 to 6 hours
per day.
My parts bin still has some of those Radio Shack parts.
<https://i.postimg.cc/D0mcbKNS/parts04.jpg> Radio Shack spare parts
those look like they're from the 1970s. why are they still unopened?
otherwise, mail order.
I don't remember ever doing mail order for basic TTL ICs, but maybe.
i did.
the back pages of popular electronics, radio electronics and similar magazines had numerous ads, including polypaks, james, olson,
lafayette, plus heathkit for entire kits.
<https://live.staticflickr.com/4009/4455981283_26760272eb_k.jpg> <https://live.staticflickr.com/2778/4455979995_b11b12c8c6_k.jpg>
I'd buy the Forest Mims' series and make circuits like with the 555 timer.
the 555 was an incredibly useful chip.
You've never told the truth in your life so why would I believe you now?
why would anyone believe someone who changes his nym more often than
his underwear?
At least I own a raspi (although it was given to me for free long ago).
only one? i have a bag full of them. they're cheap.
unfortunately, they're very backordered, with estimates that it will
resolve sometime in 2023, causing the prices on ebay to be ridiculously
high.
fortunately, i have a bunch which should last through the drought.
I'm hard-pressed to find a person who spend 4-6 hrs a day listening to
music on a 2 GB data cap. This feels to me like a bit of a unicorn. I
On 2022-04-19, Richard Falken <nospam.Richard.Falken@f1.n770.z10261.fidonet.org> wrote:
Therefore I am a bit defensive with this subject.
I'd love to see statistics about this FWIW if you're based in the
US. I'm helping out a few friends working for a local government
trialing out telecoms regulations. Data caps this low are indeed
terrible, and rural service is often the one where providers try to
cut corners the most (understandably because rural areas have low
population density and generally low incomes from the potential
subscriber base.) Rural users are often treated the worst due to the economics and a lack of awareness for rural users to be able to
complain in the necessary places. But generally, according to the
surveys my friends have run, internet isn't _this_ bad. Data caps are
higher (high enough to consume some Youtube) and speeds are, well,
okay but not good.
Nonetheless, I've been working on improving Android mirroring onto Windows but some day I might take a look at that free raspi and see what it can do.
What's interesting is I published well over a dozen tested Android apps.
Nonetheless, I've been working on improving Android mirroring onto Windows >> but some day I might take a look at that free raspi and see what it can do.
given that you can't even get android sample code to work, you are
going to have all sorts of problems getting a raspberry pi to do much
of anything.
and how do you reconcile that claim with the fact you could not get
android sample code to work?
In article <t46lvq$gdv$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:
What's interesting is I published well over a dozen tested Android apps.
so which apps on the google play store are yours?
"I wrote an app" is about as impressive as "I managed to wipe my ass all
by myself."
Lewis wrote:
"I wrote an app" is about as impressive as "I managed to wipe my ass all
by myself."
The _adults_ will notice how Lewis & nospam always prove to be
bullshitters.
Neither Lewis nor nospam has _ever_ written even a _single_ line of code.
On 2022-04-25 4:54 p.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
Lewis wrote:
"I wrote an app" is about as impressive as "I managed to wipe my ass all >>> by myself."
The _adults_ will notice how Lewis & nospam always prove to be
bullshitters.
Neither Lewis nor nospam has _ever_ written even a _single_ line of code.
Something which you cannot know is a fact, and moreover, you know you
cannot know it to be fact.
So stating it AS fact makes you a liar.
On 26/04/2022 01:28, Alan wrote:
On 2022-04-25 4:54 p.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
Lewis wrote:
"I wrote an app" is about as impressive as "I managed to wipe my ass
all
by myself."
The _adults_ will notice how Lewis & nospam always prove to be
bullshitters.
Neither Lewis nor nospam has _ever_ written even a _single_ line of
code.
Something which you cannot know is a fact, and moreover, you know you
cannot know it to be fact.
So stating it AS fact makes you a liar.
In that case all scientists are liars.
On 2022-04-26 2:20 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 26/04/2022 01:28, Alan wrote:
On 2022-04-25 4:54 p.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
Lewis wrote:
"I wrote an app" is about as impressive as "I managed to wipe my
ass all
by myself."
The _adults_ will notice how Lewis & nospam always prove to be
bullshitters.
Neither Lewis nor nospam has _ever_ written even a _single_ line of
code.
Something which you cannot know is a fact, and moreover, you know you
cannot know it to be fact.
So stating it AS fact makes you a liar.
In that case all scientists are liars.
Nope. So wrong.
On 26/04/2022 15:28, Alan wrote:
On 2022-04-26 2:20 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 26/04/2022 01:28, Alan wrote:
On 2022-04-25 4:54 p.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
Lewis wrote:
"I wrote an app" is about as impressive as "I managed to wipe my
ass all
by myself."
The _adults_ will notice how Lewis & nospam always prove to be
bullshitters.
Neither Lewis nor nospam has _ever_ written even a _single_ line of
code.
Something which you cannot know is a fact, and moreover, you know
you cannot know it to be fact.
So stating it AS fact makes you a liar.
In that case all scientists are liars.
Nope. So wrong.
Yep. which makes you a liar.
All scientists operate on the basis of theories that cannot be proven to
be correct.
On 2022-04-26 9:05 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 26/04/2022 15:28, Alan wrote:
On 2022-04-26 2:20 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 26/04/2022 01:28, Alan wrote:
On 2022-04-25 4:54 p.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
Lewis wrote:
"I wrote an app" is about as impressive as "I managed to wipe my >>>>>>> ass all
by myself."
The _adults_ will notice how Lewis & nospam always prove to be
bullshitters.
Neither Lewis nor nospam has _ever_ written even a _single_ line
of code.
Something which you cannot know is a fact, and moreover, you know
you cannot know it to be fact.
So stating it AS fact makes you a liar.
In that case all scientists are liars.
Nope. So wrong.
Yep. which makes you a liar.
All scientists operate on the basis of theories that cannot be proven
to be correct.
But they don't state that those theories are fact.
In fact, they explicitly understand that those theories are simply the
most useful thing they have.
Amazingly, you are even more ignorant than you first appeared to be.
On 26/04/2022 17:49, Alan wrote:
On 2022-04-26 9:05 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 26/04/2022 15:28, Alan wrote:
On 2022-04-26 2:20 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 26/04/2022 01:28, Alan wrote:
On 2022-04-25 4:54 p.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
Lewis wrote:
"I wrote an app" is about as impressive as "I managed to wipe my >>>>>>>> ass all
by myself."
The _adults_ will notice how Lewis & nospam always prove to be
bullshitters.
Neither Lewis nor nospam has _ever_ written even a _single_ line >>>>>>> of code.
Something which you cannot know is a fact, and moreover, you know
you cannot know it to be fact.
So stating it AS fact makes you a liar.
In that case all scientists are liars.
Nope. So wrong.
Yep. which makes you a liar.
All scientists operate on the basis of theories that cannot be proven
to be correct.
But they don't state that those theories are fact.
Oh yes they do.
I see you haven't spent time listening to scientists on the media.
In fact, they explicitly understand that those theories are simply the
most useful thing they have.
Especially 'climate scientists'
On 2022-04-27 2:43 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 26/04/2022 17:49, Alan wrote:
On 2022-04-26 9:05 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 26/04/2022 15:28, Alan wrote:
On 2022-04-26 2:20 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 26/04/2022 01:28, Alan wrote:
On 2022-04-25 4:54 p.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
Lewis wrote:
"I wrote an app" is about as impressive as "I managed to wipe >>>>>>>>> my ass all
by myself."
The _adults_ will notice how Lewis & nospam always prove to be >>>>>>>> bullshitters.
Neither Lewis nor nospam has _ever_ written even a _single_ line >>>>>>>> of code.
Something which you cannot know is a fact, and moreover, you know >>>>>>> you cannot know it to be fact.
So stating it AS fact makes you a liar.
In that case all scientists are liars.
Nope. So wrong.
Yep. which makes you a liar.
All scientists operate on the basis of theories that cannot be
proven to be correct.
But they don't state that those theories are fact.
Oh yes they do.
Nope.
I see you haven't spent time listening to scientists on the media.
In fact, they explicitly understand that those theories are simply
the most useful thing they have.
Especially 'climate scientists'
Give an example.
And yet, since there is no centre, we are at the centre of the universe
*we can see*.
Brian Cox appears not to understand eaither relativity or Quantum theory.
Name me one supporter of the hypothesis of catastrophic Mann made
climate change that says that their hypothesis is anything but fact.
Only the bleeding edge of psychicists understand that a model that
explains how things happen and predicts then reliably, is not a fact. It
is a model that reliably predicts how things happen.
The rest call it 'scientific fact''
In the case of Mann made climate change it has failed to make a single reliable climate prediction, *ever*.
your apple id has been disabled, likely because of multiple failed
login attempts because you chose to use a disposable email address and
a password you have long since forgotten, something which you bragged
about doing 'for security'.
But if you were expecting a DIY repair to be a way of saving money, then you might be a little disappointed. Apple's pricing for some of the most common replacement parts is very similar to what it'll charge you to do the repairs at an Apple Store, even when you're the one delicately taking your phone apart to swap out a broken part.
You might want to look for a "tear-down" of these cables, before you go spouting off nonsense about something you clearly do not understand.
There's a lot more to a lightning cable, USB cable, thunderbolt cable,
etc. That "a bunch of wires and two connectors".
Anyone know of such a thing at a not-too-outrageous price?
How is it you're so consistently an idiot about everything?
it is rather impressive, isn't it?
AAA batteries are always physically smaller than AA batteries and
devices that are designed to take AAA batteries will pretty much NEVER
accept an AA battery.
don't confuse the poor child.
he might think 'n' batteries are bigger yet.
2. AAA cost about the same as AA which means they cost twice as much.
(another way to look at it is they last half as long)
Wow. Wrong again!
indeed.
3. Eliminating one battery size reduces the amount of storage in my
battery drawer of Costco sizes of D, C, AA, and 9V batteries.
And if you have devices that need AAA batteries?
nothing a good lathe can't fix.
nospam wrote:
The iKooks can't ever formulate a sensible argument on ANY topic.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 371 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 175:12:05 |
| Calls: | 7,915 |
| Files: | 12,983 |
| Messages: | 5,797,729 |
![https://i.postimg.cc/LXzB3Lc0/appleid01.jpg>]](https://i.postimg.cc/LXzB3Lc0/appleid01.jpg>]){kind=link}
