• Tutorial: Working example of removing & re-installing Android system ap

    From Marion@21:1/5 to All on Fri Mar 21 05:55:59 2025
    XPost: alt.os.linux, comp.sys.mac.system

    This tutorial below shows how you can do tricks with a PC to manage the
    apps on Android, even system apps, on non-rooted Android over adb.

    This tutorial is just one of thousands of examples where it's actually
    easier to manage Android from a PC than from the Android device itself.

    But what else this tutorial shows, is that no other operating system is anything like Android in the way that this tutorial shows it works.

    I'll add the Linux/Mac folks as the test below will work the same,
    only the syntax will be easier (e.g., "grep" instead of "findstr"). =============================================================================
    *How to delete Google Discover from both your Android work & user profiles*
    <https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=57864&group=comp.mobile.android#57864>

    Basics:
    a. My Samsung Galaxy A32-5G baseband sub-version (H) is not rootable.
    b. I have no accounts on the phone (not Google, not Samsung, none).
    c. Long ago I wiped out all the bloatware using adb from Windows.
    d. I'm on Windows (but the adb commands work the same on any PC).

    It's important to note that 'Google Discover' is inside this package.
    <com.google.android.googlequicksearchbox>

    Looking it up... apparently "Discover" is a personalized feed of content provided by Google based on your past Google activity, including your
    searches, browsing history, and app usage. Yikes! I wouldn't want that.
    <https://www.samsung.com/us/support/answer/ANS10001618/#:~:text=Google%20Discover%20is%20just%20a,your%20search%20and%20browsing%20history.>

    I have that package on my Android 13 Galaxy so why don't I see "Discover"?
    adb shell pm list packages com.google.android.googlequicksearchbox
    (this lists it)

    Luckily for me, it's been long ago "disabled" by me (probably en masse):
    adb shell pm list packages -d com.google.android.googlequicksearchbox
    (this lists it)

    I looked to see if it was "stopped" also (in addition to disabled).
    adb shell "dumpsys package com.google.android.googlequicksearchbox | grep stopped="

    The output indicated that the package wasn't installed for "user 0" but it
    was installed (& working) for "user 11", so I needed to figure who is who.

    adb shell am get-current-user
    This reported that I'm user 0 when running adb

    I have a work profile (set up when testing "Island").
    Clearly the work profile is this mysterious "user 11".

    So for the work profile, the Discover functionality exists, but not for the main profile of mine (since I don't have any "accounts" set up on my phone).

    The first thing I have to do is figure out how many "users" exist.
    adb shell pm list users
    Users:
    UserInfo{0:Owner:c13} running
    UserInfo{11: Island :10b0}

    OK. That makes sense that user 0 is me, and user 11 is my work profile.

    List if the package is installed for each of those userids, 0 & 11.
    adb shell pm list packages --user 0 com.google.android.googlequicksearchbox
    (the package does NOT show up, which means it's not installe)
    adb shell pm list packages --user 11 com.google.android.googlequicksearchbox
    (the package does show up, which means it is installed)

    To remove it for user 11.
    adb shell pm uninstall --user 11 com.google.android.googlequicksearchbox
    Success

    To check that it's gone for user 11.
    adb shell pm list packages --user 11 com.google.android.googlequicksearchbox
    (the package does NOT show up, which means it's not installed)

    As a test, I tried re-installing it (from the system partition).
    adb shell cmd package install-existing com.google.android.googlequicksearchbox
    Package com.google.android.googlequicksearchbox installed for user: 0

    Notice it worked to re-install the app for user 0 but not for user 11!
    To install it back for user 11 is not simple, it turns out.

    First, check that it's not there:
    adb shell pm list packages --user 11 | findstr googlequicksearchbox
    (nothing was reported)

    The re-install for user 11 fails as the system package isn't debuggable.
    adb shell "run-as com.google.android.googlequicksearchbox cmd package install-existing com.google.android.googlequicksearchbox"
    run-as: package not debuggable: com.google.android.googlequicksearchbox

    Isn't that interesting!
    This system package isn't set to debuggable in its manifest.
    That's a security measure.

    This is a core basic feature of Android I'm hitting that no other OS does!
    a. The system partition (always!) contains the base APK!
    b. So that's why I could re-install it into the user 0 data partition.
    c. But Android won't let me re-install it into the user 11 data partition.

    Android's security model enforces strict isolation between user profiles.
    This prevents apps in one profile from accessing or modifying data in
    another profile.

    But there's a trick!

    Given you can uninstall and re-install system packages on any non-rooted Android, but you can only do so for user 0 and not for the work profile
    user 11, there's a trick to re-install this non-debuggable system package
    for the work profile user 11 which takes advantage of how Android works.

    For most (all?) system packages, Android never actually deleted them!
    adb shell pm path com.google.android.googlequicksearchbox
    package:/product/priv-app/Velvet/Velvet.apk

    Huh? Velvet? It turns out "Velvet" is a Google internal codename.

    Now copy that Velvet system APK to the computer:
    adb pull /product/priv-app/Velvet/Velvet.apk .\velvet.apk
    /product/priv-app/Velvet/Vel... (276644880 bytes in 8.645s)

    Note that I can grab things in the private system area!
    (It's read only, but wait, I can install it once I have it!)

    Now install that APK from the system partition to the work profile.
    adb install --user 11 .\velvet.apk
    Performing Streamed Install
    Success

    Now check if it's really installed for the work profile user 11.
    adb shell pm list packages --user 11 | findstr googlequicksearchbox
    (it's there!)

    In summary, this shows empirically how Android handles system packages.

    1. Any non-root user can still remove (most) system packages
    2. But, they are not deleted. They're just removed for the user
    3. They stay in the system partition (since they're system packages)

    So...
    A. You can easily re-install these deleted system packages for the user
    B. But, you have to extract them first, to re-install for the work profile

    Who knew?
    Not me.
    Now I do!

    Of course, I removed it since I don't ever want to see Google Discover!
    adb shell pm uninstall --user 0 com.google.android.googlequicksearchbox
    Success
    adb shell pm uninstall --user 11 com.google.android.googlequicksearchbox
    Success

    Double checking, they're gone.
    adb shell pm list packages --user 0 com.google.android.googlequicksearchbox
    (nothing is reported)
    adb shell pm list packages --user 11 com.google.android.googlequicksearchbox
    (nothing is reported)

    In summary, this shows how Android works, where no other OS that I know of works this way. ============================================================================

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Kenny McCormack@21:1/5 to marion@facts.com on Mon Mar 24 19:15:20 2025
    XPost: alt.os.linux, comp.sys.mac.system

    In article <vriv1f$on5$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>,
    Marion <marion@facts.com> wrote:
    ...
    In summary, this shows how Android works, where no other OS that I know of >works this way.

    Are you saying that is a Good Thing or a Bad Thing?

    --
    Donald Drumpf claims to be "the least racist person you'll ever meet".

    This would be true if the only other person you've ever met was David Duke.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Marion@21:1/5 to Kenny McCormack on Mon Mar 24 21:09:10 2025
    XPost: alt.os.linux, comp.sys.mac.system

    On Mon, 24 Mar 2025 19:15:20 -0000 (UTC), Kenny McCormack wrote :


    In summary, this shows how Android works, where no other OS that I know of >>works this way.

    Are you saying that is a Good Thing or a Bad Thing?

    Android has advantages that no other common consumer operating system has.
    So it's good.

    For example, unlike every other common consumer operating system, Android *ALWAYS* automagically saves the original APK which was used to install the app, no matter who or what entity had originally installed that app.
    a. If Samsung installed that app, then Samsung's APK is always saved;
    b. If T-Mobile installed that app, then T-Mobile's APK is always saved;
    c. If the user installed that app, the user's APK is always saved.

    That fact that the original APK is *ALWAYS* on the system can be useful.

    To my knowledge, that's just one of the many things that Android does which
    is unique to the Android operating system. No other OS does that, AFAIK.

    There's more that Android does which is unique, but saving every single APK
    on the system, no matter who installed it, is unique (AFAIK) to Android.

    Is it not?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lawrence D'Oliveiro@21:1/5 to Marion on Mon Mar 24 22:55:07 2025
    XPost: alt.os.linux, comp.sys.mac.system

    On Mon, 24 Mar 2025 21:09:10 -0000 (UTC), Marion wrote:

    To my knowledge, that's just one of the many things that Android does
    which is unique to the Android operating system. No other OS does that, AFAIK.

    On Debian derivatives, while the original .deb package file is not saved
    per se, it is possible to recreate it from the installed items with the dpkg-repack command.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Marion@21:1/5 to Lawrence D'Oliveiro on Tue Mar 25 08:33:21 2025
    XPost: alt.os.linux, comp.sys.mac.system

    On Mon, 24 Mar 2025 22:55:07 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote :


    To my knowledge, that's just one of the many things that Android does
    which is unique to the Android operating system. No other OS does that,
    AFAIK.

    On Debian derivatives, while the original .deb package file is not saved
    per se, it is possible to recreate it from the installed items with the dpkg-repack command.

    Well then, that's kind of the same thing. Thanks for adding that value.
    If you can re-create/extract a working installer, I'll count that as a win.

    One might ask why it is a great idea to always have the original installer.

    A *huge* advantage of the APK always being there is it helps to populate another phone (or a billion other phones), since you can COPY that APK.

    If it's a free app (i.e., not restricted) and if the obligatory hardware versions and API levels are compatible, it's easy to populate any other
    phone with the same apps that you have on one phone.

    How cool is that?

    Remember, there's no special software required. No backup necessary.
    The APK is always waiting for you. It's there if you ever need it.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tango Romeo@21:1/5 to Marion appears to have on Tue Mar 25 20:09:49 2025
    XPost: alt.os.linux, comp.sys.mac.system

    Marion appears to have wrote:

    A *huge* advantage of the APK always being there is it helps to populate another phone (or a billion other phones), since you can COPY that APK.

    Why aren't the installer programs restricted only to the user's ID account?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Marion@21:1/5 to Tango Romeo on Fri Mar 28 19:50:22 2025
    XPost: alt.os.linux, comp.sys.mac.system

    On Tue, 25 Mar 2025 20:09:49 -0600, Tango Romeo wrote :


    A *huge* advantage of the APK always being there is it helps to populate
    another phone (or a billion other phones), since you can COPY that APK.

    Why aren't the installer programs restricted only to the user's ID account?

    That's a deceitful lock on installers that only Apple adds.

    Nobody else but Apple prevents installer re-use on HW-compatible devices.

    Just Apple. It's just one of the many ways Apple fucks their own customers.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan@21:1/5 to Marion on Fri Mar 28 15:13:22 2025
    XPost: alt.os.linux, comp.sys.mac.system

    On 2025-03-28 12:50, Marion wrote:
    On Tue, 25 Mar 2025 20:09:49 -0600, Tango Romeo wrote :


    A *huge* advantage of the APK always being there is it helps to populate >>> another phone (or a billion other phones), since you can COPY that APK.

    Why aren't the installer programs restricted only to the user's ID
    account?

    That's a deceitful lock on installers that only Apple adds.
    Nobody else but Apple prevents installer re-use on HW-compatible devices.

    Just Apple. It's just one of the many ways Apple fucks their own customers.

    How does it "fuck" them, exactly?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Hank Rogers@21:1/5 to Alan on Fri Mar 28 18:04:58 2025
    XPost: alt.os.linux, comp.sys.mac.system

    Alan wrote:
    On 2025-03-28 12:50, Marion wrote:
    On Tue, 25 Mar 2025 20:09:49 -0600, Tango Romeo wrote :


    A *huge* advantage of the APK always being there is it helps to
    populate
    another phone (or a billion other phones), since you can COPY that APK. >>>
    Why aren't the installer programs restricted only to the user's ID
    account?

    That's a deceitful lock on installers that only Apple adds.
    Nobody else but Apple prevents installer re-use on HW-compatible devices.

    Just Apple. It's just one of the many ways Apple fucks their own
    customers.

    How does it "fuck" them, exactly?

    Ahahahahahahaha.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Isaac Montara@21:1/5 to Arno Welzel on Mon Mar 31 11:59:22 2025
    XPost: alt.os.linux, comp.sys.mac.system, comp.mobile.android

    On Mon, 31 Mar 2025 11:04:51 +0200, Arno Welzel wrote:

    What's unique to Android that no other operating system does, is Android >>>> saves every installer automatically. The installer is always there.

    And that's good.

    Unless you need the space...

    With many Android phones you can double the storage space in an instant.

    Only, if you can use MicroSD cards *and* if you configure the card to be
    used as "internal memory".

    That's just wrong. https://www.samsung.com/uk/support/mobile-devices/using-an-sd-card/

    Otherwise they only get added as external storage and can *not* be
    used to install apps on them.

    There are two use models for sdcards. Integrated Storage (also known as Internal Expansion) & Removable Storage (also known as Portable Storage). https://support.google.com/android/answer/12153449?hl=en

    And since MicroSD cards tend to work much less reliable than internal
    memory, you may also experience problems when using them this way.

    While anything can fail, your argument against removable storage is first wrong, and now faulty. https://www.wikihow.com/Use-an-SD-Card-on-Android

    Your argument is wickedly against trains because truck tires can go flat?

    And
    if the card does not work any longer, this usally means you have to
    setup at least all affected apps again and sometimes your whole device starting with a fresh installation, because you can not just replace the
    card *after* you have configured it as "internal memory".

    Your argument is like you saying we have to use a freight train instead of
    a truck to move goods and then you complain that trucks get flat tires.

    The reason your first argument is dead wrong is that you argue against
    trucks because freight trains are constrained to railroad tracks. https://www.zdnet.com/article/best-microsd-card/

    The reason your second argument is faulty is that there's redundancy in
    truck tires & failures are few & far between that they're still useful.

    A better approach is to get a device with enough internal memory for all
    your apps and their data (even mainstream devices provide at least 128
    GB or more nowadays) and use an MicroSD card for additional data like pictures, music etc. only.

    Your entire argument is first dead wrong & second overly pessimistic.

    You want to get a good memory card where it has met standards & reviews. https://www.amazon.com/Memory-Cards-Top-Brands/s?keywords=Memory+Cards

    You argue that you need to buy a warehouse because your argument is you can only transport goods using freight trains (which are severely constrained
    to railroad tracks) but then you state the reason you must buy an entire warehouse is because truck tires don't last forever, so you can't even use trucks. You must buy a huge warehouse to store your stuff.

    Put back in direct terms, almost nobody uses sdcards for Internal
    Expansion. They use sdcards for Portable Storage.

    You need to look up the difference before you make wrong & false arguments. https://www.kentfaith.ca/blog/article_how-to-use-a-sd-card-on-android_3608

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Marion@21:1/5 to Arno Welzel on Mon Mar 31 16:05:50 2025
    XPost: alt.os.linux, comp.sys.mac.system, comp.mobile.android

    On Mon, 31 Mar 2025 10:59:08 +0200, Arno Welzel wrote :


    We're talking about free app installers that the user downloads & installs. >>
    We're talking about what's *different* about Android from other operating
    systems, such as that installer APK is always sitting on the file system. >>> That's unique to Android.
    And that's a good thing.

    Because that free installer can be re-used at will.

    Just keep in mind, that newer are not published using APK any longer but using AAB (Android Application Bundle). This means, the device only gets
    an APK generated by Google with files required for that specific device configuration. This *may* work on other devices as well if they are
    similar enough - but you also may have to download the app again on the
    other device, for example when the app uses native code which needs to
    be specific for the CPU architecture of the device.

    Also see: <https://developer.android.com/guide/app-bundle>

    Yup. The Android newsgroup discussed AAB's before that change happened.

    *Google is moving away from APKs on the Play Store*
    *for new apps as AABs starting in August 2021* (June 30, 2021)
    <https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/yVBkScCyI_I/>

    Has anything changed since June 30, 2021 on those details?
    Specifically, now that we're four years later into AABs, what has changed?

    For me, I haven't noticed anything detrimental. Have you?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Arno Welzel@21:1/5 to All on Mon Mar 31 19:45:19 2025
    XPost: alt.os.linux, comp.sys.mac.system, comp.mobile.android

    Marion, 2025-03-31 18:05:

    [...]
    Yup. The Android newsgroup discussed AAB's before that change happened.

    *Google is moving away from APKs on the Play Store*
    *for new apps as AABs starting in August 2021* (June 30, 2021)
    <https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/yVBkScCyI_I/>

    Has anything changed since June 30, 2021 on those details?
    Specifically, now that we're four years later into AABs, what has changed?

    For me, I haven't noticed anything detrimental. Have you?

    So you don't wish to have this mentioned this, just because years ago
    this was already discussed?


    --
    Arno Welzel
    https://arnowelzel.de

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan@21:1/5 to Bill Powell on Mon Mar 31 10:49:01 2025
    XPost: alt.os.linux, comp.sys.mac.system, comp.mobile.android

    On 2025-03-31 00:16, Bill Powell wrote:
    On Sun, 30 Mar 2025 17:04:13 -0700, Alan wrote:

    What's unique to Android that no other operating system does, is Android >>> saves every installer automatically. The installer is always there.

    And that's good.

    Unless you need the space...

    With many Android phones you can double the storage space in an instant.

    But far from all.

    And I bet there are a lot of users who don't realize they can do that.


    Here's a 128GB high quality SanDisk 200MB/s sdcard for twenty bucks. https://www.amazon.com/SanDisk-128GB-Extreme-UHS-I-Memory/dp/B09X7FXHVJ/

    If that is too small, here's a fast 512GB card for thirty-five bucks. https://www.amazon.com/SAMSUNG-microSDXC-Nintendo-Switch-MB-ME512SA-AM/ dp/B0CWPPMD8W/

    How much does it cost to double storage space on a typical iPhone?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Arno Welzel@21:1/5 to All on Mon Mar 31 19:42:58 2025
    XPost: alt.os.linux, comp.sys.mac.system, comp.mobile.android

    Isaac Montara, 2025-03-31 17:59:

    On Mon, 31 Mar 2025 11:04:51 +0200, Arno Welzel wrote:

    What's unique to Android that no other operating system does, is Android >>>>> saves every installer automatically. The installer is always there.

    And that's good.

    Unless you need the space...

    With many Android phones you can double the storage space in an instant.

    Only, if you can use MicroSD cards *and* if you configure the card to be
    used as "internal memory".

    That's just wrong. https://www.samsung.com/uk/support/mobile-devices/using-an-sd-card/

    No - you contradict yourself below...

    Otherwise they only get added as external storage and can *not* be
    used to install apps on them.

    There are two use models for sdcards. Integrated Storage (also known as Internal Expansion) & Removable Storage (also known as Portable Storage). https://support.google.com/android/answer/12153449?hl=en

    Exactly - this is what I talked about. Why do you say, I am wrong, when
    you confirm exactly what I explained?

    And since MicroSD cards tend to work much less reliable than internal
    memory, you may also experience problems when using them this way.

    While anything can fail, your argument against removable storage is first wrong, and now faulty. https://www.wikihow.com/Use-an-SD-Card-on-Android

    What's your problem?

    Your argument is wickedly against trains because truck tires can go flat?

    What?

    [...]
    Your entire argument is first dead wrong & second overly pessimistic.

    No, it is based on nearly 20 years of experience with that. Do you want
    all my dead microSD cards? I can give you many examples of cards which
    died over the years.

    --
    Arno Welzel
    https://arnowelzel.de

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Your Name@21:1/5 to Bill Powell on Tue Apr 1 10:55:31 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On 2025-03-31 07:16:34 +0000, Bill Powell said:
    On Sun, 30 Mar 2025 17:04:13 -0700, Alan wrote:

    What's unique to Android that no other operating system does, is Android >>> saves every installer automatically. The installer is always there.

    And that's good.

    Unless you need the space...

    With many Android phones you can double the storage space in an instant.

    Here's a 128GB high quality SanDisk 200MB/s sdcard for twenty bucks. https://www.amazon.com/SanDisk-128GB-Extreme-UHS-I-Memory/dp/B09X7FXHVJ/

    If that is too small, here's a fast 512GB card for thirty-five bucks. https://www.amazon.com/SAMSUNG-microSDXC-Nintendo-Switch-MB-ME512SA-AM/dp/B0CWPPMD8W/


    How much does it cost to double storage space on a typical iPhone?

    Very little since you can easily use any external drive, including
    relatively dirt cheap, high capacity hard drives. At worst, you'll need
    to add an adaptor to the price.

    But of course, as the usual anti-Apple know-nothing troll, you don't
    realise that actual fact nor the fact that most people simply don't
    give a crap about increasing their device's storage capacity, whether
    that is Apple or Android.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Marion@21:1/5 to Arno Welzel on Mon Mar 31 22:32:49 2025
    XPost: alt.os.linux, comp.sys.mac.system, comp.mobile.android

    On Mon, 31 Mar 2025 19:45:19 +0200, Arno Welzel wrote :


    For me, I haven't noticed anything detrimental. Have you?

    So you don't wish to have this mentioned this, just because years ago
    this was already discussed?

    I'm backing you up. I'm agreeing with you. I'm not disagreeing at all.

    In fact, I asked for more information from you, so of course I love that
    it's mentioned, where I haven't noticed anything detrimental since then.

    Have you?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Marion@21:1/5 to Your Name on Mon Mar 31 22:29:59 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On Tue, 1 Apr 2025 10:55:31 +1300, Your Name wrote :


    How much does it cost to double storage space on a typical iPhone?

    Very little since you can easily use any external drive, including
    relatively dirt cheap, high capacity hard drives. At worst, you'll need
    to add an adaptor to the price.

    But of course, as the usual anti-Apple know-nothing troll, you don't
    realise that actual fact nor the fact that most people simply don't
    give a crap about increasing their device's storage capacity, whether
    that is Apple or Android.

    In the words of nospam, anything Apple can't do, even the most basic of features, is "not needed" and "not wanted" (such as more storage).

    Yet, given the only way you can add "more storage" to that portable device
    is you have to bolt on huge heavy cumbersome devices, it must be wanted.

    Why else would an iPhone owner use your Apple clusterfuck suggestion of carrying around a high-capacity drive in their pocket with their phone?

    To do that, iPhone users must be *desperate* for that extra storage, right?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Isaac Montara@21:1/5 to Arno Welzel on Mon Mar 31 18:40:45 2025
    XPost: alt.os.linux, comp.sys.mac.system, comp.mobile.android

    On Mon, 31 Mar 2025 19:42:58 +0200, Arno Welzel wrote:

    Your entire argument is first dead wrong & second overly pessimistic.

    No, it is based on nearly 20 years of experience with that. Do you want
    all my dead microSD cards? I can give you many examples of cards which
    died over the years.

    I didn't mean to offend you. I was just explaining that there are two
    possible common uses of sdcards on Android devices, one of which is to
    extend the memory but almost nobody bothers doing that nowadays.

    The second usage is what everyone who puts a card in their phone does.
    It is instant "extra storage" which is cheap and reliable.

    You can say you have "many examples" of cards that failed just as the rest
    of us (including me) have "many examples" of cards that did not fail on us.

    I've never had a card fail. Does that mean anything? Not much.
    It just means that putting the card inside the phone works wonders for me.

    If I wanted to, it's easy to back up as almost all PCs have sd drives.

    If putting the card inside your phone isn't working for you, then maybe
    your phone is a Pixel? If so, that's your fault for buying Google phones.

    Both Apple & Google don't want you to have inexpensive reliable storage.
    Can you guess why?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Hank Rogers@21:1/5 to Alan on Mon Mar 31 18:06:49 2025
    XPost: alt.os.linux, comp.sys.mac.system, comp.mobile.android

    Alan wrote:
    On 2025-03-31 00:16, Bill Powell wrote:
    On Sun, 30 Mar 2025 17:04:13 -0700, Alan wrote:

    What's unique to Android that no other operating system does, is
    Android
    saves every installer automatically. The installer is always there.

    And that's good.

    Unless you need the space...

    With many Android phones you can double the storage space in an instant.

    But far from all.

    And I bet there are a lot of users who don't realize they can do that.

    Nope, they would get bombarded by sales adds the same as if it was an
    apple phone. Wake up, we live in a society similar to the star trek
    Ferengi culture. Every seller tries to maximize profits. Doesn't matter
    if it's apple or any other ferengi with some shit to sell. Even if their
    shit is not as good as apple's shit.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lawrence D'Oliveiro@21:1/5 to Carlos E.R. on Wed Apr 2 02:10:33 2025
    XPost: alt.os.linux, comp.sys.mac.system, comp.mobile.android

    On Sat, 29 Mar 2025 13:33:43 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:

    But Apple is a commercial system. They do not provide free software.

    The two are not mutually exclusive. Some Apple funding goes to LLVM and
    CUPS, that I can think of. Does that count as “providing” Free software to you?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Peter@21:1/5 to Isaac Montara on Wed Apr 2 09:28:37 2025
    XPost: alt.os.linux, comp.sys.mac.system, comp.mobile.android

    Isaac Montara <IsaacMontara@nospam.com> wrote:

    Both Apple & Google don't want you to have inexpensive reliable storage.
    Can you guess why?

    ooooh ooooh oooh (raises hand and flags down the professor)...
    Let me guess.

    Apple gives you 5GB of "free" cloud storage for your 256GB device, which
    means you have to multiply that 5GB by about 50 times to store your stuff.

    If you want to expand your storage about 200GB, both Apple & Google will
    charge you the same low low incredibly low (act fast!) monthly fee of only
    a mere pittance of $2.99 per month, which is about $36 for a year (which, incidentally, is about how much any similar sized sd card would have cost).

    But then you need that storage for ten years (or whatever), so now that one-time NRE of ~$36 would have saved you ~$360 dollars paying for storage.

    Since both Apple & Google benefit to the tune of a few hundred dollars per
    each person who owns their devices has to pay them, it makes sense why they don't spend the couple of bucks it would cost for them to put an sdslot in.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Carlos E.R.@21:1/5 to Lawrence D'Oliveiro on Wed Apr 2 12:58:14 2025
    XPost: alt.os.linux, comp.sys.mac.system, comp.mobile.android

    On 2025-04-02 04:10, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    On Sat, 29 Mar 2025 13:33:43 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:

    But Apple is a commercial system. They do not provide free software.

    The two are not mutually exclusive. Some Apple funding goes to LLVM and
    CUPS, that I can think of. Does that count as “providing” Free software to
    you?

    Ok, agreed, they do provide some free software.

    --
    Cheers, Carlos.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Peter@21:1/5 to AJL on Wed Apr 2 18:10:17 2025
    XPost: alt.os.linux, comp.sys.mac.system, comp.mobile.android

    AJL <noemail@none.com> wrote:

    I pay Google 2 bucks/mo US for 1GB.

    Typo. Should be 100GB

    Not a big $$$ deal for me. YMMV. I use
    it for off site backup (like if the house burns down) and it is also
    conveniently available to any of my devices pretty much anywhere if wanted >> or needed. A card just wouldn't provide the same service or use, although I >> do keep one locally in case Google burns down.

    My only problem with that thought process is that it's a justification for
    NOT having something. It's like a guy with only one leg justifying why he's hopping all the time. Phones with the sdcard slot can hop just like you do.

    The point was that Apple & Google don't put the sd card slot in phones for
    a reason, which is NOT that they want to give you the best phone possible.

    They want to cut off your leg so that you buy their prosthetic device.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Your Name@21:1/5 to Carlos E.R. on Thu Apr 3 09:34:53 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On 2025-04-02 10:58:14 +0000, Carlos E.R. said:
    On 2025-04-02 04:10, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    On Sat, 29 Mar 2025 13:33:43 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:

    But Apple is a commercial system. They do not provide free software.

    The two are not mutually exclusive. Some Apple funding goes to LLVM and
    CUPS, that I can think of. Does that count as “providing” Free software to
    you?

    Ok, agreed, they do provide some free software.

    Apple of course provides a ton of free software for users of Apple
    devices, including iMovie, Garage Band, Mail, Safari, Passwords, Pages, Numbers, Keynote, Music, Messages, Photos, Time Machine, etc. ... plus
    the various Apple operating systems themselves.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Peter@21:1/5 to AJL on Thu Apr 3 00:35:30 2025
    XPost: alt.os.linux, comp.sys.mac.system, comp.mobile.android

    AJL <noemail@none.com> wrote:

    The point was that Apple & Google don't put the sd card slot in phones for >>a reason, which is NOT that they want to give you the best phone possible.

    Guess you missed my point (and fact). Unlike Apple iOS devices the vast vast
    majority of Android phones (and tablets etc) that run Google accounts and
    apps are NOT made by Google and thus Google has no say over whether the
    device has a slot or not. That is the *individual manufacturers* choice...

    Thanks for the clarification which I agree with you I had missed the point.

    There are 1,936 Android models (2020 to present), with a standard sd slot. https://www.gsmarena.com/results.php3?nYearMin=2020&sAvailabilities=1,2&idCardslot=1

    There are 986 Android models (2020 to present), without a standard sd slot. https://www.gsmarena.com/search.php3?nYearMin=2020&sAvailabilities=1,2&idOS=2&idCardslot=1

    Out of 2,922 recent Androids in use today, 1/3rd have a standard slot.

    The biggest Android seller is Samsung, which outsold the iPhone every
    quarter for the past few years (except for a single quarter last year).

    So let's look at Samsung phones for the percentage that have the sdslot.

    There are 134 Samsung models with that industry standard sd slot. https://www.gsmarena.com/search.php3?nYearMin=2020&sMakers=9&sAvailabilities=1,2&idOS=2&idCardslot=1

    Compared to 44 Samsung models without the industry standard sd slot. https://www.gsmarena.com/search.php3?nYearMin=2020&sMakers=9&sAvailabilities=1,2&idOS=2&idCardslot=3

    Out of 178 recent Samsung models still in use today, 75% have the sd slot.

    We know Apple's strategy is to fleece the customer so it's zero percent.
    But what about Google whose strategy is also to fleece the customer?

    Just as with Apple, there are 0 Google phones with the standard sd slot. https://www.gsmarena.com/search.php3?nYearMin=2020&sMakers=107&sAvailabilities=1,2&idOS=2&idCardslot=1

    So my statements remain backed up that Google & Apple don't provide what
    over three quarters of Samsung phones provide, and Samsung is clearly the
    best seller on the market bar none (Apple iPhones don't even come close).

    I wonder if people buy Samsungs because they don't have the strategy of fleecing them by removing hardware so that the consumer has to buy it back?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Peter@21:1/5 to AJL on Thu Apr 3 06:57:03 2025
    XPost: alt.os.linux, comp.sys.mac.system, comp.mobile.android

    AJL <noemail@none.com> wrote:

    So my statements remain backed up that Google & Apple don't provide what >>over three quarters of Samsung phones provide, and Samsung is clearly the >>best seller on the market bar none (Apple iPhones don't even come close).

    I guess it's how one reads your original statement. When one compares Apple
    and Google phones I think most folks think Android phones with Google
    installed. But you are correct if you mean only Google Pixel phones. I
    guess what threw me off is that would leave out the majority of the
    non-Apple market, many with no slots. Shouldn't they have required some of
    your wrath too?

    I'm glad you clarified and I apologize for not fully understanding you.

    I think we're both communicating well now, given how conversations go.
    When you said 'Google', I didn't realize you had maybe meant 'Android'.

    When I think of a "Google phone", I think of the Pixel model only.
    But you were apparently thinking of Google's Android OS - which is fine.

    The beauty of Android is if you *want* the sdcard slot, you can get it.
    Most Android's sold are Samsung & 75% of the Samsung models have the slot.

    Maybe that's why most Android's sold are Samsungs in the first place. :)

    I wonder if people buy Samsungs because they don't have the strategy of >>fleecing them by removing hardware so that the consumer has to buy it back?

    I bought my Samsung phone over 5 years ago and I can't remember what my
    reasons were for buying it over other brands. But I can tell you it is
    still a virgin. I've never had any need to stick anything in it's slot...

    If you don't need the memory, the slot doesn't help or hurt you.
    But if you need the memory, NOT having the slot hurts you a lot.

    Fundamentally, everything else being equal, a phone without the slot is
    clearly a substandard phone to one that has the slot. That's pure logic.

    I'm use to people making the argument that a worse phone is better.
    But they don't know anything about basic logic since that makes no sense.

    A phone with the slot, everything else being equal, can not only do
    EVERYTHING that the phone without the slot can do, but it can do more.

    And what it can do no phone on the planet without a slot can hope to do.
    That's worth a lot when you need it; and it's worth nothing if you don't.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan@21:1/5 to Marion on Thu Apr 3 14:15:43 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On 2025-04-02 16:38, Marion wrote:
    On Thu, 3 Apr 2025 09:34:53 +1300, Your Name wrote :


    But Apple is a commercial system. They do not provide free software.

    The two are not mutually exclusive. Some Apple funding goes to LLVM and >>>> CUPS, that I can think of. Does that count as ´providing¡ Free software to
    you?

    Ok, agreed, they do provide some free software.

    Apple of course provides a ton of free software for users of Apple
    devices, including iMovie, Garage Band, Mail, Safari, Passwords, Pages,
    Numbers, Keynote, Music, Messages, Photos, Time Machine, etc. ... plus
    the various Apple operating systems themselves.

    There is a ton of "free software" for both iOS and for Android.

    What's unique about iOS is that you can't re-use that free software.
    That's bad.

    It would be...

    ...if it were true...

    ...but it's false.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From WolfFan@21:1/5 to All on Fri Apr 4 18:28:06 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On Apr 4, 2025, WolfFan wrote
    (in article<0001HW.2DA093F100430FAE7000070DE38F@news.supernews.com>):

    On Apr 3, 2025, Alan wrote
    (in article <vsmtpv$1kssr$5@dont-email.me>):

    On 2025-04-02 16:38, Marion wrote:
    On Thu, 3 Apr 2025 09:34:53 +1300, Your Name wrote :


    But Apple is a commercial system. They do not provide free software.

    The two are not mutually exclusive. Some Apple funding goes to LLVM and
    CUPS, that I can think of. Does that count as ´providing¡ Free software to
    you?

    Ok, agreed, they do provide some free software.

    Apple of course provides a ton of free software for users of Apple devices, including iMovie, Garage Band, Mail, Safari, Passwords, Pages, Numbers, Keynote, Music, Messages, Photos, Time Machine, etc. ... plus the various Apple operating systems themselves.

    There is a ton of "free software" for both iOS and for Android.

    What's unique about iOS is that you can't re-use that free software. That's bad.

    Hmm. Looks at nice shiny new iPhone 16, currently downloading all the stuff which was on the iPhone 11 which I had before updating to a 16. All of it. Looks at the old iPhone 11, sitting next to the 16. Is all my stuff still there? Why yes it is. I’m going to have to erase the 11 before sending it off to AT&T to get the refund to apply to the price of the 16. Until then, all my stuff, including all the free Apple stuff, will be on two phones. Hmm... now where is that... ah, there it is. My ancient iPhone 6, which had been too old to trade in on the 11. Let me plug it in and power it up... why there is all my stuff as it was before I got the 11. As the 6 no longer has a SIM, it can’t make calls... if it’s not on a network with a device with the same AppleID. Which it is. It can use my old stuff. It can be upgraded to the limits of the hardware. It can make calls. Why. all my old free Apple stuff is in _three_ places. Damn, that’s good for something which can’t be re-used...

    Oh. Wait. I have an iPad. Did the stuff from the iPhone show on the iPad? Why yes it did. That’s _four_ places, all of which can be used, two of which can run all of the latest and greatest versions, one more of which can run most of the latest and greatest until I reformat it to send it to AT&T. And if I didn’t want AT&T’s bounty I’d be able to use the 11, just as I can still use the 6. Note that ’same network as a device with the same AppleID’ includes Macs and, to a limited extent, iCloud-equipped WinBoxen. I can use the 6 as a phone. Still. Even if I don’t have the 16, the 11, or the iPad. I can use the apps, including the Apple apps, on it...

    And I can use iCloud web apps on the WinBoxen, including Find My, Maps, iWork, more... Damn. That’s _seven_ places, one made by ASUS, one. by Lenovo, one by MSI, not Apple! Damn! is there no limit to Apple’s perfidy? Forcing users to be able to use free Apple stuff ANYWHERE THEY BLOODY WANT TO? The horror. The horror.

    It would be...

    ...if it were true...

    ...but it's false.

    Alden’s an idiot.

    that should be ‘Arlen’, damn it.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From WolfFan@21:1/5 to Alan on Fri Apr 4 18:25:53 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On Apr 3, 2025, Alan wrote
    (in article <vsmtpv$1kssr$5@dont-email.me>):

    On 2025-04-02 16:38, Marion wrote:
    On Thu, 3 Apr 2025 09:34:53 +1300, Your Name wrote :


    But Apple is a commercial system. They do not provide free software.

    The two are not mutually exclusive. Some Apple funding goes to LLVM and
    CUPS, that I can think of. Does that count as ´providing¡ Free software to
    you?

    Ok, agreed, they do provide some free software.

    Apple of course provides a ton of free software for users of Apple devices, including iMovie, Garage Band, Mail, Safari, Passwords, Pages, Numbers, Keynote, Music, Messages, Photos, Time Machine, etc. ... plus the various Apple operating systems themselves.

    There is a ton of "free software" for both iOS and for Android.

    What's unique about iOS is that you can't re-use that free software.
    That's bad.

    Hmm. Looks at nice shiny new iPhone 16, currently downloading all the stuff which was on the iPhone 11 which I had before updating to a 16. All of it. Looks at the old iPhone 11, sitting next to the 16. Is all my stuff still there? Why yes it is. I’m going to have to erase the 11 before sending it
    off to AT&T to get the refund to apply to the price of the 16. Until then,
    all my stuff, including all the free Apple stuff, will be on two phones.
    Hmm... now where is that... ah, there it is. My ancient iPhone 6, which had been too old to trade in on the 11. Let me plug it in and power it up... why there is all my stuff as it was before I got the 11. As the 6 no longer has a SIM, it can’t make calls... if it’s not on a network with a device with
    the same AppleID. Which it is. It can use my old stuff. It can be upgraded to the limits of the hardware. It can make calls. Why. all my old free Apple
    stuff is in _three_ places. Damn, that’s good for something which can’t
    be re-used...

    Oh. Wait. I have an iPad. Did the stuff from the iPhone show on the iPad? Why yes it did. That’s _four_ places, all of which can be used, two of which
    can run all of the latest and greatest versions, one more of which can run
    most of the latest and greatest until I reformat it to send it to AT&T. And
    if I didn’t want AT&T’s bounty I’d be able to use the 11, just as I can still use the 6. Note that ’same network as a device with the same
    AppleID’ includes Macs and, to a limited extent, iCloud-equipped WinBoxen.
    I can use the 6 as a phone. Still. Even if I don’t have the 16, the 11, or the iPad. I can use the apps, including the Apple apps, on it...

    And I can use iCloud web apps on the WinBoxen, including Find My, Maps,
    iWork, more... Damn. That’s _seven_ places, one made by ASUS, one. by
    Lenovo, one by MSI, not Apple! Damn! is there no limit to Apple’s perfidy? Forcing users to be able to use free Apple stuff ANYWHERE THEY BLOODY WANT
    TO? The horror. The horror.

    It would be...

    ...if it were true...

    ...but it's false.

    Alden’s an idiot.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Marion@21:1/5 to WolfFan on Sat Apr 5 00:34:15 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 18:25:53 -0400, WolfFan wrote :


    There is a ton of "free software" for both iOS and for Android.

    What's unique about iOS is that you can't re-use that free software.
    That's bad.

    Hmm. Looks at nice shiny new iPhone 16, currently downloading all the stuff which was on the iPhone 11 which I had before updating to a 16. All of it. Looks at the old iPhone 11, sitting next to the 16. Is all my stuff still there? Why yes it is.

    The problem with you Apple trolls is you have no idea how things work in
    the real world. You live in a restrictive cave that Apple created for you.

    On every other platform but iOS, you can take that installer (in your case,
    the IPA file) and install it on *billions* of other similar devices.

    Yes. Billions. The point being the installer isn't locked solely to you.
    Only Apple locks free installers so that you *must* download them again.

    Nobody else does that.
    Just Apple.

    And that's bad.
    Apple's ecosystem locks you under the surface of the earth as if in a cave.

    I'm going to have to erase the 11 before sending it
    off to AT&T to get the refund to apply to the price of the 16.

    Thank you for bringing up that only Apple owners are so desperate to recoup some of the immense money they paid that they pine for trade-in assistance.

    Apple owners are mainly the only people who pay twice as much for the
    phone, then line up at the store to ditch that phone at the first chance.

    Then, they get half as much back for the original phone, just to pay twice
    as much for the phone that they lined up outside the store to get.

    They *hate* their phones so much that they can't wait to ditch them.
    And that's bad.

    The entire Apple ecosystem is like living in an underground cavern.

    Until then,
    all my stuff, including all the free Apple stuff, will be on two phones. Hmm... now where is that... ah, there it is. My ancient iPhone 6, which had been too old to trade in on the 11. Let me plug it in and power it up... why there is all my stuff as it was before I got the 11. As the 6 no longer has a SIM, it can't make calls... if it's not on a network with a device with
    the same AppleID. Which it is. It can use my old stuff. It can be upgraded to the limits of the hardware. It can make calls. Why. all my old free Apple stuff is in _three_ places. Damn, that's good for something which can't
    be re-used...

    Now install on that iPhone 11 all the software that is on that iPhone 6
    that is no longer on the Apple App Store. C'mon. Do it. Do it now.

    Oh wait. You can't.

    Every other operating system allows re-use (as long as the hardware is compatible) but only Apple prevents you from re-using your apps.

    You've been in a cave the moment you bought into the Apple ecosystem.

    Oh. Wait. I have an iPad. Did the stuff from the iPhone show on the iPad? Why yes it did. That's _four_ places, all of which can be used, two of which
    can run all of the latest and greatest versions, one more of which can run most of the latest and greatest until I reformat it to send it to AT&T. And if I didn't want AT&T's bounty I'd be able to use the 11, just as I can
    still use the 6. Note that 'same network as a device with the same
    AppleID' includes Macs and, to a limited extent, iCloud-equipped WinBoxen.
    I can use the 6 as a phone. Still. Even if I don't have the 16, the 11, or the iPad. I can use the apps, including the Apple apps, on it...

    You have a lot of software on that iPad, right? So now your next-door
    neighbor and your best friend and *billions* of others want those IPAs.

    How do you get those IPAs to those people so they can re-use your apps?
    You can't.

    On *every* other operating system, you can. You are suffocated by Apple.
    Apple has you living in a cave that has no air vents to the outside world.

    And I can use iCloud web apps on the WinBoxen, including Find My, Maps, iWork, more... Damn. That's _seven_ places, one made by ASUS, one. by
    Lenovo, one by MSI, not Apple! Damn! is there no limit to Apple's perfidy? Forcing users to be able to use free Apple stuff ANYWHERE THEY BLOODY WANT TO? The horror. The horror.

    I realize you live in a cave made by Apple, suffocated by the fact that
    Apple locks each and every IPA to your AppleID and only to your AppleID.

    I realize Apple tracks you since you can't leave that cave, forever.

    But what you need to realize is that everyone else in the world except
    Apple owners has full & complete re-use of free software app installers.

    Good for the rest of the world; bad for Apple owners.

    Unfortunately, when it comes to app re-use, Apple owners live in a cave.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lawrence D'Oliveiro@21:1/5 to Your Name on Sat Apr 5 22:57:23 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On Thu, 3 Apr 2025 09:34:53 +1300, Your Name wrote:

    Apple of course provides a ton of free software for users of Apple
    devices, including iMovie, Garage Band, Mail, Safari, Passwords, Pages, Numbers, Keynote, Music, Messages, Photos, Time Machine, etc. ... plus
    the various Apple operating systems themselves.

    Freeware <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeware> is not Free software <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software>.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Carlos E.R.@21:1/5 to Marion on Sun Apr 6 13:18:29 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On 2025-04-03 01:38, Marion wrote:
    On Thu, 3 Apr 2025 09:34:53 +1300, Your Name wrote :


    But Apple is a commercial system. They do not provide free software.

    The two are not mutually exclusive. Some Apple funding goes to LLVM and >>>> CUPS, that I can think of. Does that count as ´providing¡ Free software to
    you?

    Ok, agreed, they do provide some free software.

    Apple of course provides a ton of free software for users of Apple
    devices, including iMovie, Garage Band, Mail, Safari, Passwords, Pages,
    Numbers, Keynote, Music, Messages, Photos, Time Machine, etc. ... plus
    the various Apple operating systems themselves.

    There is a ton of "free software" for both iOS and for Android.

    What's unique about iOS is that you can't re-use that free software.
    That's bad.

    Then it is not Free software. Free as in Freedom.


    What's common about all other operating systems is that you can.
    That's good.


    --
    Cheers, Carlos.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Your Name@21:1/5 to Carlos E.R. on Mon Apr 7 09:45:51 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On 2025-04-06 11:18:29 +0000, Carlos E.R. said:
    On 2025-04-03 01:38, Marion wrote:
    On Thu, 3 Apr 2025 09:34:53 +1300, Your Name wrote :
    But Apple is a commercial system. They do not provide free software. >>>>>
    The two are not mutually exclusive. Some Apple funding goes to LLVM and >>>>> CUPS, that I can think of. Does that count as ´providing¡ Free software to
    you?

    Ok, agreed, they do provide some free software.

    Apple of course provides a ton of free software for users of Apple
    devices, including iMovie, Garage Band, Mail, Safari, Passwords, Pages,
    Numbers, Keynote, Music, Messages, Photos, Time Machine, etc. ... plus
    the various Apple operating systems themselves.

    There is a ton of "free software" for both iOS and for Android.

    What's unique about iOS is that you can't re-use that free software.
    That's bad.

    Then it is not Free software. Free as in Freedom.

    "Marion" is simply a brainless anti-Apple know-nothing troll. Please
    just ignore / killfile the moron and stop re-cross-posting the crap.



    What's common about all other operating systems is that you can.
    That's good.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Arno Welzel@21:1/5 to All on Mon Apr 7 18:57:32 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    Alan, 2025-04-03 23:15:

    On 2025-04-02 16:38, Marion wrote:
    On Thu, 3 Apr 2025 09:34:53 +1300, Your Name wrote :


    But Apple is a commercial system. They do not provide free software. >>>>>
    The two are not mutually exclusive. Some Apple funding goes to LLVM and >>>>> CUPS, that I can think of. Does that count as ´providing¡ Free software to
    you?

    Ok, agreed, they do provide some free software.

    Apple of course provides a ton of free software for users of Apple
    devices, including iMovie, Garage Band, Mail, Safari, Passwords, Pages,
    Numbers, Keynote, Music, Messages, Photos, Time Machine, etc. ... plus
    the various Apple operating systems themselves.

    There is a ton of "free software" for both iOS and for Android.

    What's unique about iOS is that you can't re-use that free software.
    That's bad.

    It would be...

    ...if it were true...

    ...but it's false.

    There is a difference between software which is "for free" and software
    which is "free".

    "Free software" is usually open source and you can use the source code
    for your own versions with any modifications you want to apply to it.

    Is the source code of iMovie, Garage Band, Mail, Safari, Passwords,
    Pages, Numbers, Keynote, Music, Messages, Photos, Time Machine open and available? Or are these programs just "for free" aka "gratis"?



    --
    Arno Welzel
    https://arnowelzel.de

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Marion@21:1/5 to Arno Welzel on Mon Apr 7 20:34:07 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 18:57:32 +0200, Arno Welzel wrote :


    "Free software" is usually open source and you can use the source code
    for your own versions with any modifications you want to apply to it.

    Hi Arno,

    I use iOS and Windows and Android concurrently, all day, every day.
    Most people do not (and I used to use Linux all day, every day too).

    So I know what's UNIQUE about iOS when it comes to Apple IPA locks.

    You're apparently responding to Alan Baker, who, besides being an Apple
    troll (i.e., one who brazenly denies everything he hates about Apple
    products), has never in his life ever used Windows, Linux or Android.

    Hence, he thinks "re-use" is about "free & open source", where even if an
    app is free & open source, if Apple distributes it, they have control.

    Apple can even revoke your use of that "free & open source" app, if they
    want to, since Apple controls every action you perform with that app.

    Hence, the point about "re-use" I'm making has nothing to do with the type
    of software since *every* IPA on an iOS device is locked to 1 AppleID
    (note there are family-plans too, but that's essentially the same thing).

    Most people have no idea how restrictive the Apple subterranean cave
    ecosystem is; they're unaware that you can not re-use that IPA on another device which has a *different* Apple ID, even if it's free & open source.

    No other common consumer operating system restricts free app re-use.
    Only Apple.

    And that's bad.

    Read on only if you're technically inclined to know what's going on.

    When an IPA is installed on an iOS device, it's signed with a provisioning profile that is tied to a specific Apple Developer account and a set of authorized devices. For apps downloaded from the App Store, this process is managed by Apple and linked to your Apple ID.

    All apps, even those which might be considered "free & open source" suffer
    this process, since every single app ever downloaded from Apple's App Store restricts their usage to the Apple ID that originally downloaded them.

    While you can "sideload" apps on iOS (using Developer Certificates), that process is not typically performed by the common user but it too is
    restricted, but usually to a number of installations & not to an Apple ID.

    The Mac also ties a "free & open source" Apple App Store app to your Apple
    ID, but the Mac allows re-use on another Mac of a different Apple ID; but
    not really since updates can't happen on apps which are copied from one Mac
    to another. However, to its credit, the Mac can download an app from the developer's web site, and that app is not tied to the Apple ID by Apple.

    So in that respect, the Mac is more like every other operating system.

    The question now arises as to *why* Apple adds your unique Apple ID to
    every app installed from the Apple App Store, even those which you'd
    otherwise consider to be "free & open source". Note that Apple can track
    not only your usage of that app, but meta data inherent in that usage.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Carlos E.R.@21:1/5 to Marion on Tue Apr 8 00:45:01 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On 2025-04-07 22:34, Marion wrote:
    On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 18:57:32 +0200, Arno Welzel wrote :


    "Free software" is usually open source and you can use the source code
    for your own versions with any modifications you want to apply to it.

    Hi Arno,

    I use iOS and Windows and Android concurrently, all day, every day.
    Most people do not (and I used to use Linux all day, every day too).

    So I know what's UNIQUE about iOS when it comes to Apple IPA locks.

    You're apparently responding to Alan Baker, who, besides being an Apple
    troll (i.e., one who brazenly denies everything he hates about Apple products), has never in his life ever used Windows, Linux or Android.

    No, we are talking to you.

    ...

    No other common consumer operating system restricts free app re-use.
    Only Apple.

    Arlen, that defines that software as "non Free", period. Don't beat
    around the bush. Meaning, don't write long explanations. That is not
    Free software. It may be gratis, but it is not Free. Uppercase.

    ...

    --
    Cheers, Carlos.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Marion@21:1/5 to Carlos E.R. on Tue Apr 8 00:01:55 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 00:45:01 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote :


    No other common consumer operating system restricts free app re-use.
    Only Apple.

    that defines that software as "non Free", period. Don't beat
    around the bush. Meaning, don't write long explanations. That is not
    Free software. It may be gratis, but it is not Free. Uppercase.

    There is free open source software which does not cost money but when distributed by the Apple App Store, it's locked to a specific Apple ID.

    No other operating system vendor does that for software that is free.
    Only Apple.

    Call it whatever you want to call it, but that's what Apple does to it.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Carlos E.R.@21:1/5 to Marion on Tue Apr 8 02:37:12 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On 2025-04-08 02:01, Marion wrote:
    On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 00:45:01 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote :


    No other common consumer operating system restricts free app re-use.
    Only Apple.

    that defines that software as "non Free", period. Don't beat
    around the bush. Meaning, don't write long explanations. That is not
    Free software. It may be gratis, but it is not Free. Uppercase.

    There is free open source software which does not cost money but when distributed by the Apple App Store, it's locked to a specific Apple ID.

    No other operating system vendor does that for software that is free.
    Only Apple.

    AGAIN, that is not FREE Software.

    Stop calling it Free. It ain't. This is serious, Arlen. Study it up. You
    claim to be clever. Be it.


    Call it whatever you want to call it, but that's what Apple does to it.

    I don't care who does it.

    --
    Cheers, Carlos.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Marion@21:1/5 to Carlos E.R. on Tue Apr 8 06:07:52 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 02:37:12 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote :


    There is free open source software which does not cost money but when
    distributed by the Apple App Store, it's locked to a specific Apple ID.

    No other operating system vendor does that for software that is free.
    Only Apple.

    AGAIN, that is not FREE Software.

    Stop calling it Free. It ain't. This is serious, Arlen. Study it up. You claim to be clever. Be it.


    Call it whatever you want to call it, but that's what Apple does to it.

    I don't care who does it.

    The fact that only Apple adds locks (to an Apple ID) on software that no
    other operating system locks is the technical point that matters here.

    That lock goes on *all* software from Apple. Every single app. Every type.
    No matter what type of app it is. It gets that unique lock only Apple does.

    That's what's different. The lock. It's unique. Only Apple does that.

    That lock prevents re-use. And that lock allows Apple to track you.
    And that's what's bad.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Daniel70@21:1/5 to Marion on Tue Apr 8 19:19:39 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On 8/04/2025 4:07 pm, Marion wrote:
    On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 02:37:12 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote :

    There is free open source software which does not cost money but when
    distributed by the Apple App Store, it's locked to a specific Apple ID.

    No other operating system vendor does that for software that is free.
    Only Apple.

    AGAIN, that is not FREE Software.

    Stop calling it Free. It ain't. This is serious, Arlen. Study it up. You
    claim to be clever. Be it.

    Call it whatever you want to call it, but that's what Apple does to it.

    I don't care who does it.

    The fact that only Apple adds locks (to an Apple ID) on software that no other operating system locks is the technical point that matters here.

    That lock goes on *all* software from Apple. Every single app. Every type.
    No matter what type of app it is. It gets that unique lock only Apple does.

    That's what's different. The lock. It's unique. Only Apple does that.

    That lock prevents re-use. And that lock allows Apple to track you.
    And that's what's bad.

    Am I mis-reading what is being posted here??

    Both Marion *AND* Carlos E.R. seem to be suggesting that *only* Apple
    locks a user into their/Apples system .... Other OSs/systems are not
    locking their users into THEIR OSs/Systems.

    Or am I mis-understanding what is being posted??
    --
    Daniel70

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Frankie@21:1/5 to Marion on Tue Apr 8 10:28:44 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On 8/4/2025, Marion wrote:

    The *reason* you can't re-use Apple IPAs is Apple locks the downloaded software to a specific unique Apple ID so that it can only be installed on devices with that specific unique Apple ID.

    What happens if you subsequently remove the Apple ID from the iOS device?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Marion@21:1/5 to All on Tue Apr 8 10:25:29 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 19:19:39 +1000, Daniel70 wrote :


    Am I mis-reading what is being posted here??

    Both Marion *AND* Carlos E.R. seem to be suggesting that *only* Apple
    locks a user into their/Apples system .... Other OSs/systems are not
    locking their users into THEIR OSs/Systems.

    Or am I mis-understanding what is being posted??

    Assuming compatible hardware & operating system APIs... it's a fact that...

    1. On Windows, Linux, Android & to some extent macOS, if you download
    any installer (from anywhere), that installer can (almost always)
    be re-used on any other similar machine (assuming compatible hardware).

    2. On iOS, it can't.

    The *reason* you can't re-use Apple IPAs is Apple locks the downloaded
    software to a specific unique Apple ID so that it can only be installed on devices with that specific unique Apple ID.

    In summary, all common platforms allow re-use of installers... except iOS.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Carlos E.R.@21:1/5 to Frankie on Tue Apr 8 13:07:50 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On 2025-04-08 12:28, Frankie wrote:
    On 8/4/2025, Marion wrote:

    The *reason* you can't re-use Apple IPAs is Apple locks the downloaded
    software to a specific unique Apple ID so that it can only be installed on >> devices with that specific unique Apple ID.

    What happens if you subsequently remove the Apple ID from the iOS device?

    Arlen, you are talking to yourself. This is very bad manners.

    --
    Cheers, Carlos.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Carlos E.R.@21:1/5 to All on Tue Apr 8 13:06:55 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On 2025-04-08 11:19, Daniel70 wrote:
    On 8/04/2025 4:07 pm, Marion wrote:
    On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 02:37:12 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote :

    There is free open source software which does not cost money but when
    distributed by the Apple App Store, it's locked to a specific Apple ID. >>>>
    No other operating system vendor does that for software that is free.
    Only Apple.

    AGAIN, that is not FREE Software.

    Stop calling it Free. It ain't. This is serious, Arlen. Study it up. You >>> claim to be clever. Be it.

    Call it whatever you want to call it, but that's what Apple does to it. >>>
    I don't care who does it.

    The fact that only Apple adds locks (to an Apple ID) on software that no
    other operating system locks is the technical point that matters here.

    That lock goes on *all* software from Apple. Every single app. Every
    type.
    No matter what type of app it is. It gets that unique lock only Apple
    does.

    That's what's different. The lock. It's unique. Only Apple does that.

    That lock prevents re-use. And that lock allows Apple to track you.
    And that's what's bad.

    Am I mis-reading what is being posted here??

    Both Marion *AND* Carlos E.R. seem to be suggesting that *only* Apple
    locks a user into their/Apples system .... Other OSs/systems are not
    locking their users into THEIR OSs/Systems.

    Or am I mis-understanding what is being posted??

    No, I am saying nothing about the lock. I don't care, I don't have any
    Apple.

    What I say is that if there is a lock, the Apple software may be gratis,
    but it is not Free (as in Freedom). Free means I am free to take the
    source code, remove the lock, recompile, and sell it myself. With
    variants in the details by the licensing.

    --
    Cheers, Carlos.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan@21:1/5 to Carlos E.R. on Tue Apr 8 09:42:51 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On 2025-04-08 04:06, Carlos E.R. wrote:
    On 2025-04-08 11:19, Daniel70 wrote:
    On 8/04/2025 4:07 pm, Marion wrote:
    On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 02:37:12 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote :

    There is free open source software which does not cost money but when >>>>> distributed by the Apple App Store, it's locked to a specific Apple
    ID.

    No other operating system vendor does that for software that is free. >>>>> Only Apple.

    AGAIN, that is not FREE Software.

    Stop calling it Free. It ain't. This is serious, Arlen. Study it up.
    You
    claim to be clever. Be it.

    Call it whatever you want to call it, but that's what Apple does to
    it.

    I don't care who does it.

    The fact that only Apple adds locks (to an Apple ID) on software that no >>> other operating system locks is the technical point that matters here.

    That lock goes on *all* software from Apple. Every single app. Every
    type.
    No matter what type of app it is. It gets that unique lock only Apple
    does.

    That's what's different. The lock. It's unique. Only Apple does that.

    That lock prevents re-use. And that lock allows Apple to track you.
    And that's what's bad.

    Am I mis-reading what is being posted here??

    Both Marion *AND* Carlos E.R. seem to be suggesting that *only* Apple
    locks a user into their/Apples system .... Other OSs/systems are not
    locking their users into THEIR OSs/Systems.

    Or am I mis-understanding what is being posted??

    No, I am saying nothing about the lock. I don't care, I don't have any
    Apple.

    What I say is that if there is a lock, the Apple software may be gratis,
    but it is not Free (as in Freedom). Free means I am free to take the
    source code, remove the lock, recompile, and sell it myself. With
    variants in the details by the licensing.


    Carlos, you personally don't get to decide for the world what the word
    "free" means.

    Sorry to burst your bubble on this.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Marion@21:1/5 to Carlos E.R. on Tue Apr 8 18:00:38 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 13:07:50 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote :


    This is very bad manners.

    Speaking of bad manners, the point of this offshoot is about good & bad.

    1. Only iOS *locks* every installer to a specific unique ID.
    2. This is bad for two reasons, one of which is it prevents reuse.
    3. The other reason it's bad is Apple uniquely is tracking app metadata.

    Apple (yet again) brazenly lied about being more private than Android.
    Apple gets away with these lies because their customer is rather ignorant.

    Even so, the average Android user likely doesn't know these basic facts.
    A. Only Android *always* auto-saves the original installer on the device.
    B. Which is good (because it allows re-use on billions of other devices).

    In summary, only Android saves the original installer on the device.
    And that's good.

    And only iOS locks every app installer to a unique specific user.
    And that's bad.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Carlos E.R.@21:1/5 to Alan on Tue Apr 8 22:50:43 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On 2025-04-08 18:42, Alan wrote:
    On 2025-04-08 04:06, Carlos E.R. wrote:
    On 2025-04-08 11:19, Daniel70 wrote:
    On 8/04/2025 4:07 pm, Marion wrote:
    On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 02:37:12 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote :

    There is free open source software which does not cost money but when >>>>>> distributed by the Apple App Store, it's locked to a specific
    Apple ID.

    No other operating system vendor does that for software that is free. >>>>>> Only Apple.

    AGAIN, that is not FREE Software.

    Stop calling it Free. It ain't. This is serious, Arlen. Study it
    up. You
    claim to be clever. Be it.

    Call it whatever you want to call it, but that's what Apple does
    to it.

    I don't care who does it.

    The fact that only Apple adds locks (to an Apple ID) on software
    that no
    other operating system locks is the technical point that matters here. >>>>
    That lock goes on *all* software from Apple. Every single app. Every
    type.
    No matter what type of app it is. It gets that unique lock only
    Apple does.

    That's what's different. The lock. It's unique. Only Apple does that.

    That lock prevents re-use. And that lock allows Apple to track you.
    And that's what's bad.

    Am I mis-reading what is being posted here??

    Both Marion *AND* Carlos E.R. seem to be suggesting that *only* Apple
    locks a user into their/Apples system .... Other OSs/systems are not
    locking their users into THEIR OSs/Systems.

    Or am I mis-understanding what is being posted??

    No, I am saying nothing about the lock. I don't care, I don't have any
    Apple.

    What I say is that if there is a lock, the Apple software may be
    gratis, but it is not Free (as in Freedom). Free means I am free to
    take the source code, remove the lock, recompile, and sell it myself.
    With variants in the details by the licensing.


    Carlos, you personally don't get to decide for the world what the word
    "free" means.

    It is not my definition.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software

    *Free software*

    Free software, libre software, libreware[1][2] sometimes known as freedom-respecting software is computer software distributed under terms
    that allow users to run the software for any purpose as well as to
    study, change, distribute it and any adapted versions.[3][4][5][6] Free software is a matter of liberty, not price; all users are legally free
    to do what they want with their copies of a free software (including
    profiting from them) regardless of how much is paid to obtain the program.[7][2] Computer programs are deemed "free" if they give
    end-users (not just the developer) ultimate control over the software
    and, subsequently, over their devices.[5][8]

    The right to study and modify a computer program entails that the source code—the preferred format for making changes—be made available to users
    of that program. While this is often called "access to source code" or
    "public availability", the Free Software Foundation (FSF) recommends
    against thinking in those terms,[9] because it might give the impression
    that users have an obligation (as opposed to a right) to give non-users
    a copy of the program.

    Although the term "free software" had already been used loosely in the
    past and other permissive software like the Berkeley Software
    Distribution released in 1978 existed,[10] Richard Stallman is credited
    with tying it to the sense under discussion and starting the free
    software movement in 1983, when he launched the GNU Project: a
    collaborative effort to create a freedom-respecting operating system,
    and to revive the spirit of cooperation once prevalent among hackers
    during the early days of computing.[11][12]


    Sorry to burst your bubble on this.

    Sorry to burst yours.

    --
    Cheers, Carlos.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From vallor@21:1/5 to Alan on Tue Apr 8 22:55:30 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 09:42:51 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote in <vt3jmb$2kvf6$1@dont-email.me>:

    On 2025-04-08 04:06, Carlos E.R. wrote:
    On 2025-04-08 11:19, Daniel70 wrote:
    On 8/04/2025 4:07 pm, Marion wrote:
    On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 02:37:12 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote :

    There is free open source software which does not cost money but
    when distributed by the Apple App Store, it's locked to a specific >>>>>> Apple ID.

    No other operating system vendor does that for software that is
    free.
    Only Apple.

    AGAIN, that is not FREE Software.

    Stop calling it Free. It ain't. This is serious, Arlen. Study it up. >>>>> You claim to be clever. Be it.

    Call it whatever you want to call it, but that's what Apple does to >>>>>> it.

    I don't care who does it.

    The fact that only Apple adds locks (to an Apple ID) on software that
    no other operating system locks is the technical point that matters
    here.

    That lock goes on *all* software from Apple. Every single app. Every
    type.
    No matter what type of app it is. It gets that unique lock only Apple
    does.

    That's what's different. The lock. It's unique. Only Apple does that.

    That lock prevents re-use. And that lock allows Apple to track you.
    And that's what's bad.

    Am I mis-reading what is being posted here??

    Both Marion *AND* Carlos E.R. seem to be suggesting that *only* Apple
    locks a user into their/Apples system .... Other OSs/systems are not
    locking their users into THEIR OSs/Systems.

    Or am I mis-understanding what is being posted??

    No, I am saying nothing about the lock. I don't care, I don't have any
    Apple.

    What I say is that if there is a lock, the Apple software may be
    gratis,
    but it is not Free (as in Freedom). Free means I am free to take the
    source code, remove the lock, recompile, and sell it myself. With
    variants in the details by the licensing.


    Carlos, you personally don't get to decide for the world what the word
    "free" means.

    Sorry to burst your bubble on this.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software

    --
    -v System76 Thelio Mega v1.1 x86_64 NVIDIA RTX 3090 Ti
    OS: Linux 6.14.1 Release: Mint 22.1 Mem: 258G
    "Let's organize this thing and take all the fun out of it."

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From vallor@21:1/5 to All on Tue Apr 8 22:57:30 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 22:50:43 +0200, "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote in <3qegclxei2.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>:

    On 2025-04-08 18:42, Alan wrote:
    On 2025-04-08 04:06, Carlos E.R. wrote:
    On 2025-04-08 11:19, Daniel70 wrote:
    On 8/04/2025 4:07 pm, Marion wrote:
    On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 02:37:12 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote :

    There is free open source software which does not cost money but >>>>>>> when distributed by the Apple App Store, it's locked to a specific >>>>>>> Apple ID.

    No other operating system vendor does that for software that is
    free.
    Only Apple.

    AGAIN, that is not FREE Software.

    Stop calling it Free. It ain't. This is serious, Arlen. Study it
    up. You claim to be clever. Be it.

    Call it whatever you want to call it, but that's what Apple does >>>>>>> to it.

    I don't care who does it.

    The fact that only Apple adds locks (to an Apple ID) on software
    that no other operating system locks is the technical point that
    matters here.

    That lock goes on *all* software from Apple. Every single app. Every >>>>> type.
    No matter what type of app it is. It gets that unique lock only
    Apple does.

    That's what's different. The lock. It's unique. Only Apple does
    that.

    That lock prevents re-use. And that lock allows Apple to track you.
    And that's what's bad.

    Am I mis-reading what is being posted here??

    Both Marion *AND* Carlos E.R. seem to be suggesting that *only* Apple
    locks a user into their/Apples system .... Other OSs/systems are not
    locking their users into THEIR OSs/Systems.

    Or am I mis-understanding what is being posted??

    No, I am saying nothing about the lock. I don't care, I don't have any
    Apple.

    What I say is that if there is a lock, the Apple software may be
    gratis, but it is not Free (as in Freedom). Free means I am free to
    take the source code, remove the lock, recompile, and sell it myself.
    With variants in the details by the licensing.


    Carlos, you personally don't get to decide for the world what the word
    "free" means.

    It is not my definition.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software

    *Free software*

    Free software, libre software, libreware[1][2] sometimes known as freedom-respecting software is computer software distributed under terms
    that allow users to run the software for any purpose as well as to
    study, change, distribute it and any adapted versions.[3][4][5][6] Free software is a matter of liberty, not price; all users are legally free
    to do what they want with their copies of a free software (including profiting from them) regardless of how much is paid to obtain the program.[7][2] Computer programs are deemed "free" if they give
    end-users (not just the developer) ultimate control over the software
    and, subsequently, over their devices.[5][8]

    The right to study and modify a computer program entails that the source code—the preferred format for making changes—be made available to users of that program. While this is often called "access to source code" or "public availability", the Free Software Foundation (FSF) recommends
    against thinking in those terms,[9] because it might give the impression
    that users have an obligation (as opposed to a right) to give non-users
    a copy of the program.

    Although the term "free software" had already been used loosely in the
    past and other permissive software like the Berkeley Software
    Distribution released in 1978 existed,[10] Richard Stallman is credited
    with tying it to the sense under discussion and starting the free
    software movement in 1983, when he launched the GNU Project: a
    collaborative effort to create a freedom-respecting operating system,
    and to revive the spirit of cooperation once prevalent among hackers
    during the early days of computing.[11][12]


    Sorry to burst your bubble on this.

    Sorry to burst yours.

    Aw, you beat me to it.

    You are correct, of course -- it's free as in "free speech",
    not "free beer".

    --
    -v System76 Thelio Mega v1.1 x86_64 NVIDIA RTX 3090 Ti
    OS: Linux 6.14.1 Release: Mint 22.1 Mem: 258G
    "Mothers are the necessity of invention -- Calvin"

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Marion@21:1/5 to vallor on Wed Apr 9 01:19:15 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On 8 Apr 2025 22:55:30 GMT, vallor wrote :


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software

    Since you and Carlos are the ones who know more than I do about this...
    "LocalSend is fundamentally free and open-source software (FOSS).
    This means its source code is publicly available, allowing anyone
    to inspect, modify, and distribute it. This core principle
    remains regardless of how it's distributed."

    I aim for software that is akin to free beer, where I don't generally
    modify that beer and then redistribute it, but, Apple seems to be doing
    that in a way that is sanctioned by the provider of that free beer.
    <https://github.com/localsend/localsend/>

    That is, if we go to the web page for LocalSend, it has a privacy policy.
    <https://localsend.org/>

    Then, that LocalSend site has a link to an iOS section.
    <https://localsend.org/download?os=ios>

    Which then takes us to the suggested iOS IPA on the Apple App Store.
    <https://apps.apple.com/us/app/localsend/id1661733229>

    When you download that IPA, you can only do so with a valid Apple ID.

    And then Apple unilaterally inserts not only a lock to that Apple ID,
    but Apple also invasively tracks your every use of that software,
    outside of the original privacy policy of the LocalSend web page.

    Given those facts, now what would you call this software knowing that?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Your Name@21:1/5 to Carlos E.R. on Wed Apr 9 16:24:00 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On 2025-04-08 11:06:55 +0000, Carlos E.R. said:
    On 2025-04-08 11:19, Daniel70 wrote:
    On 8/04/2025 4:07 pm, Marion wrote:
    On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 02:37:12 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote :

    There is free open source software which does not cost money but when >>>>> distributed by the Apple App Store, it's locked to a specific Apple ID. >>>>>
    No other operating system vendor does that for software that is free. >>>>> Only Apple.

    AGAIN, that is not FREE Software.

    Stop calling it Free. It ain't. This is serious, Arlen. Study it up. You >>>> claim to be clever. Be it.

    Call it whatever you want to call it, but that's what Apple does to it. >>>>
    I don't care who does it.

    The fact that only Apple adds locks (to an Apple ID) on software that no >>> other operating system locks is the technical point that matters here.

    That lock goes on *all* software from Apple. Every single app. Every type. >>> No matter what type of app it is. It gets that unique lock only Apple does. >>>
    That's what's different. The lock. It's unique. Only Apple does that.

    That lock prevents re-use. And that lock allows Apple to track you.
    And that's what's bad.

    Am I mis-reading what is being posted here??

    Both Marion *AND* Carlos E.R. seem to be suggesting that *only* Apple
    locks a user into their/Apples system .... Other OSs/systems are not
    locking their users into THEIR OSs/Systems.

    Or am I mis-understanding what is being posted??

    No, I am saying nothing about the lock. I don't care, I don't have any Apple.

    What I say is that if there is a lock,

    There is no "lock". Purchases from Apple's App Store are linked to the
    Apple user ID, but that's simply because not all apps on the App Store
    are free, so they are all linked to an user ID. If you've bought an app
    or downloaded a free app, then you can easily re-download it on any new
    device (assuming it works on it) at no cost simply by using the same
    Apple user ID.

    If it's a free app, then any other user can download it using their own
    Apple user ID anyway.

    It is of course just the usual anti-Apple, know-nothing trolls like
    "Marion" making a massive mountain out of a grain of sand.




    the Apple software may be gratis, but it is not Free (as in Freedom).

    Free means you don't pay any money for it. It has nothing to do with "freedom".



    Free means I am free to take the source code, remove the lock,
    recompile, and sell it myself. With variants in the details by the
    licensing.

    That is "open source", an entirely different thing. Plus "open source"
    is not always actually free, since in some cases you actually still
    have to pay for it.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Marion@21:1/5 to Your Name on Wed Apr 9 05:35:57 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 16:24:00 +1200, Your Name wrote :


    There is no "lock". Purchases from Apple's App Store are linked to the
    Apple user ID, but that's simply because not all apps on the App Store
    are free, so they are all linked to an user ID. If you've bought an app
    or downloaded a free app, then you can easily re-download it on any new device (assuming it works on it) at no cost simply by using the same
    Apple user ID.

    If it's a free app, then any other user can download it using their own
    Apple user ID anyway.

    It is of course just the usual anti-Apple, know-nothing trolls like
    "Marion" making a massive mountain out of a grain of sand.

    For adults on this newsgroup, notice how Apple trolls brazenly lie about something as well known as the fact Apple locks every IPA to an Apple ID.
    <https://www.theverge.com/2021/5/3/22418410/epic-v-apple-trial-app-store-grip-ios-tim-cook-testimony>

    Notice Apple never tells the truth, except in court, where they are forced,
    by law, to tell the truth that they lock EVERY single app to an Apple ID.
    <https://www.lifewire.com/transfer-app-store-purchases-to-another-apple-id-4173604>

    These Apple trolls *hate* that only Apple locks each & every app, whether
    or not it's a free app or otherwise - when no other OS vendor does that.
    <https://www.imore.com/how-view-and-redownload-your-past-app-store-purchases-iphone-and-ipad>

    Just Apple.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Arno Welzel@21:1/5 to All on Wed Apr 9 12:29:44 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    Marion, 2025-04-07 22:34:

    [...]
    When an IPA is installed on an iOS device, it's signed with a provisioning profile that is tied to a specific Apple Developer account and a set of authorized devices. For apps downloaded from the App Store, this process is managed by Apple and linked to your Apple ID.

    All apps, even those which might be considered "free & open source" suffer this process, since every single app ever downloaded from Apple's App Store restricts their usage to the Apple ID that originally downloaded them.

    Well - in that case this is irrelevant, since free apps can be
    downloaded again from the original source.

    [...]
    The question now arises as to *why* Apple adds your unique Apple ID to
    every app installed from the Apple App Store, even those which you'd otherwise consider to be "free & open source". Note that Apple can track
    not only your usage of that app, but meta data inherent in that usage.

    Maybe because for *paid* apps Apple wants to control on which devices
    the app is used. And since apple does not expect anyone providing apps
    for free, this also affects those apps as well. Also keep in min: to
    distribute apps in the App Store you have to pay a yearly fee for the membership in the developer program, regardless if your app is a free
    app or not.

    --
    Arno Welzel
    https://arnowelzel.de

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Arno Welzel@21:1/5 to All on Wed Apr 9 12:31:12 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    Marion, 2025-04-08 02:01:

    On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 00:45:01 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote :


    No other common consumer operating system restricts free app re-use.
    Only Apple.

    that defines that software as "non Free", period. Don't beat
    around the bush. Meaning, don't write long explanations. That is not
    Free software. It may be gratis, but it is not Free. Uppercase.

    There is free open source software which does not cost money but when distributed by the Apple App Store, it's locked to a specific Apple ID.

    Which is irrelevant, since you can just download it again, if needed.


    --
    Arno Welzel
    https://arnowelzel.de

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Arno Welzel@21:1/5 to All on Wed Apr 9 12:35:58 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    Marion, 2025-04-08 12:25:

    On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 19:19:39 +1000, Daniel70 wrote :


    Am I mis-reading what is being posted here??

    Both Marion *AND* Carlos E.R. seem to be suggesting that *only* Apple
    locks a user into their/Apples system .... Other OSs/systems are not
    locking their users into THEIR OSs/Systems.

    Or am I mis-understanding what is being posted??

    Assuming compatible hardware & operating system APIs... it's a fact that...

    1. On Windows, Linux, Android & to some extent macOS, if you download
    any installer (from anywhere), that installer can (almost always)
    be re-used on any other similar machine (assuming compatible hardware).

    2. On iOS, it can't.

    Which is irrelevant, since you do not copy the installer itself to
    another device as you can do in Linux or Windows. The usual way would be
    to use the App Store again to download and install the app again if needed.

    Even in Android it is not the usual way to copy APK files from one
    device to another if you change your device. Yes, technicall it *may* be possible - but only if the app was not distributed as AAB (Android
    application bundle) with device specific parts which may not even work
    on the other device due to different CPU architecture. But Google Play
    only provides the device specific APK not the AAB which was used by the publisher to upload the app in the first place.

    The *reason* you can't re-use Apple IPAs is Apple locks the downloaded software to a specific unique Apple ID so that it can only be installed on devices with that specific unique Apple ID.

    Yes - so what? Nobody will or can even copy installer files from one
    iPhone or iPad to another to get them re-used with a different Apple ID.


    --
    Arno Welzel
    https://arnowelzel.de

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Arno Welzel@21:1/5 to All on Wed Apr 9 12:37:51 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    Marion, 2025-04-08 20:00:

    On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 13:07:50 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote :


    This is very bad manners.

    Speaking of bad manners, the point of this offshoot is about good & bad.

    1. Only iOS *locks* every installer to a specific unique ID.
    2. This is bad for two reasons, one of which is it prevents reuse.

    Which is irrelevant for most cases, since installer files can not just
    be copied from one iPhone to another anyway.



    --
    Arno Welzel
    https://arnowelzel.de

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Arno Welzel@21:1/5 to All on Wed Apr 9 12:39:43 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    Alan, 2025-04-08 18:42:

    On 2025-04-08 04:06, Carlos E.R. wrote:
    [...]
    What I say is that if there is a lock, the Apple software may be gratis,
    but it is not Free (as in Freedom). Free means I am free to take the
    source code, remove the lock, recompile, and sell it myself. With
    variants in the details by the licensing.


    Carlos, you personally don't get to decide for the world what the word
    "free" means.

    Correct - there is a well established definition for it:

    <https://www.fsf.org/about/what-is-free-software>



    --
    Arno Welzel
    https://arnowelzel.de

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Carlos E.R.@21:1/5 to Marion on Wed Apr 9 12:42:59 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On 2025-04-09 03:19, Marion wrote:
    On 8 Apr 2025 22:55:30 GMT, vallor wrote :


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software

    Since you and Carlos are the ones who know more than I do about this...
    "LocalSend is fundamentally free and open-source software (FOSS).
    This means its source code is publicly available, allowing anyone
    to inspect, modify, and distribute it. This core principle
    remains regardless of how it's distributed."

    I aim for software that is akin to free beer, where I don't generally
    modify that beer and then redistribute it, but, Apple seems to be doing
    that in a way that is sanctioned by the provider of that free beer.
    <https://github.com/localsend/localsend/>

    That is, if we go to the web page for LocalSend, it has a privacy policy.
    <https://localsend.org/>

    Then, that LocalSend site has a link to an iOS section.
    <https://localsend.org/download?os=ios>

    Which then takes us to the suggested iOS IPA on the Apple App Store.
    <https://apps.apple.com/us/app/localsend/id1661733229>

    When you download that IPA, you can only do so with a valid Apple ID.

    And then Apple unilaterally inserts not only a lock to that Apple ID,
    but Apple also invasively tracks your every use of that software,
    outside of the original privacy policy of the LocalSend web page.

    Given those facts, now what would you call this software knowing that?

    I don't know. I don't know the Apple ecosystem.

    This may be akin to using software with key certificates. The
    verification of the certificate is open, but once there whatever the key
    opens is there.

    Like sending an email encrypted or signed by PGP. The software itself is
    open, but it can not falsely claim encryption. Some programmer could
    take, say Thunderbird, and create a fork that falsely claims to encrypt
    but the mail is also using a key that the NSA can open.

    This does exist, I worked for a company which allowed PGP in their
    corporate email, but using a doctored version that added a key owned by
    the company, so that they could read any email.

    Is that Free Software? Well, their PGP version was published, license unchanged, AFAIK.

    --
    Cheers, Carlos.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Zaidy036@21:1/5 to Your Name on Wed Apr 9 13:55:14 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On 4/9/2025 12:24 AM, Your Name wrote:
    On 2025-04-08 11:06:55 +0000, Carlos E.R. said:
    On 2025-04-08 11:19, Daniel70 wrote:
    On 8/04/2025 4:07 pm, Marion wrote:
    On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 02:37:12 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote :

    There is free open source software which does not cost money but when >>>>>> distributed by the Apple App Store, it's locked to a specific
    Apple ID.

    No other operating system vendor does that for software that is free. >>>>>> Only Apple.

    AGAIN, that is not FREE Software.

    Stop calling it Free. It ain't. This is serious, Arlen. Study it
    up. You
    claim to be clever. Be it.

    Call it whatever you want to call it, but that's what Apple does
    to it.

    I don't care who does it.

    The fact that only Apple adds locks (to an Apple ID) on software
    that no
    other operating system locks is the technical point that matters here. >>>>
    That lock goes on *all* software from Apple. Every single app. Every
    type.
    No matter what type of app it is. It gets that unique lock only
    Apple does.

    That's what's different. The lock. It's unique. Only Apple does that.

    That lock prevents re-use. And that lock allows Apple to track you.
    And that's what's bad.

    Am I mis-reading what is being posted here??

    Both Marion *AND* Carlos E.R. seem to be suggesting that *only* Apple
    locks a user into their/Apples system .... Other OSs/systems are not
    locking their users into THEIR OSs/Systems.

    Or am I mis-understanding what is being posted??

    No, I am saying nothing about the lock. I don't care, I don't have any
    Apple.

    What I say is that if there is a lock,

    There is no "lock". Purchases from Apple's App Store are linked to the
    Apple user ID, but that's simply because not all apps on the App Store
    are free, so they are all linked to an user ID. If you've bought an app
    or downloaded a free app, then you can easily re-download it on any new device (assuming it works on it) at no cost simply by using the same
    Apple user ID.

    If it's a free app, then any other user can download it using their own
    Apple user ID anyway.

    It is of course just the usual anti-Apple, know-nothing trolls like
    "Marion" making a massive mountain out of a grain of sand.




    the Apple software may be gratis, but it is not Free (as in Freedom).

    Free means you don't pay any money for it. It has nothing to do with "freedom".



     Free means I am free to take the source code, remove the lock,
    recompile, and sell it myself. With variants in the details by the
    licensing.

    That is "open source", an entirely different thing. Plus "open source"
    is not always actually free, since in some cases you actually still have
    to pay for it.


    or Family connection

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Marion@21:1/5 to Arno Welzel on Wed Apr 9 20:03:40 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 12:37:51 +0200, Arno Welzel wrote :


    This is very bad manners.

    Speaking of bad manners, the point of this offshoot is about good & bad.

    1. Only iOS *locks* every installer to a specific unique ID.
    2. This is bad for two reasons, one of which is it prevents reuse.

    Which is irrelevant for most cases, since installer files can not just
    be copied from one iPhone to another anyway.

    The main point is that only Apple locks every IPA to a specific user.
    And that's bad.

    However... since these are technical ngs, it's important to note that, if you're knowledgeable, you can sideload a physical .ipa file onto an iOS
    device using specialized tools such as Xcode, AltStore, Sideloadly, etc.
    <https://www.macobserver.com/ios/install-apps-outside-app-store/>

    But it's not something that the average iOS user can easily accomplish.
    <https://www.macobserver.com/tips/how-to/how-sideload-apps-ios/>

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Marion@21:1/5 to Arno Welzel on Wed Apr 9 20:43:30 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 12:35:58 +0200, Arno Welzel wrote :


    The *reason* you can't re-use Apple IPAs is Apple locks the downloaded
    software to a specific unique Apple ID so that it can only be installed on >> devices with that specific unique Apple ID.

    Yes - so what? Nobody will or can even copy installer files from one
    iPhone or iPad to another to get them re-used with a different Apple ID.

    What we're all trying to do is learn how the various systems work.

    The original question was what was *different* & whether it was good or
    bad, where what's different with iOS is Apple locks every installer to you.

    Apple thinks that's good because it prevents Apple owners from ever leaving
    the subterranean passageways that are often referred to as the "ecosystem".

    I think it's bad for that very same reason.

    Just one example of where it's bad compared to other operating systems is
    the common situation of the last known good version of any given app.

    If you happen to have installed on your Android the last known good version
    of any given app, you can re-install that app on *billions* of Androids.

    The point not being the sheer number but the fact it's unrestricted re-use. However... that same scenario won't work for iOS owners. And that's bad.

    Even an iTunes "backup" of that last known good version of an app does not contain a re-usable IPA to that last known good version of that iOS app.

    The app backup only contains garbage such as meta data & app data.
    But the app backup (even with iTunes) does NOT contain the full ipa file.

    The Apple user is always fucked by Apple.

    Every other operating system allows the user to re-install the last known
    good version after a factory reset (or crash, or whatever)... except Apple.

    And that's bad.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Marion@21:1/5 to Arno Welzel on Wed Apr 9 20:58:11 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 12:31:12 +0200, Arno Welzel wrote :


    There is free open source software which does not cost money but when
    distributed by the Apple App Store, it's locked to a specific Apple ID.

    Which is irrelevant, since you can just download it again, if needed.

    People on this newsgroup are supposed to understand that which they claim.

    I don't think you yet understand that your statement is patently false.
    Since these are technical newsgroups, it behooves you to understand iOS.

    Let's take a simple example that has happened to all of us at some point.
    a. Let's say you've got a free app on Windows, iOS and Android;
    b. Let's say the "latest version" is not the "last known good version";
    c. Let's say you've been diligent with the backups on all 3 platforms.

    Sounds great so far, right?
    Now... let's say something unforeseen happens & you do a factory reset.

    Now what?
    Please answer the question below.

    Q: What happens on each operating system with respect to the re-install?
    Choice A. You're fucked on iOS.
    Choice B. You're fucked on iOS, but you're fine on Android.
    Choice C. You're fucked on iOS, but you're fine on Windows.

    Please choose any of the above which apply to that common situation.
    You must choose at least one, where the best answer is choose all three.
    --
    Apple created a subterranean cavern they euphemistically call the
    "ecosystem" which traps their users in a prison beneath the real world.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Marion@21:1/5 to Your Name on Wed Apr 9 21:28:33 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 09:45:51 +1200, Your Name wrote :


    simply a brainless anti-Apple know-nothing troll.

    These are technical newsgroups... and this is a technical subject.

    The adults will notice we're talking how iOS is different from all other operating systems, e.g., an app backup is essentially impossible on iOS.

    And yet, the Apple trolls (like Your Name) hate that we're discussing this technical feature of iOS which - let's face it - is unique among systems.

    Only Apple doesn't allow iOS users the common decency of an app backup.
    The only thing Apple allows the poor iOS user to back up is the app data.

    But not the app.
    And that's bad.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Marion@21:1/5 to All on Wed Apr 9 21:55:38 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 13:55:14 -0400, Zaidy036 wrote :


    That is "open source", an entirely different thing. Plus "open source"
    is not always actually free, since in some cases you actually still have
    to pay for it.

    or Family connection

    Zaidy036 is correct, and I must also state he has helped me in the past.
    So I respect his knowledge (he even wrote some of the scripts that I use).

    I've mentioned the family sharing a few times, but it changes nothing other than "a few more people" can use the same apps from a single IPA download.

    BTW, not Zaidy, but for those Apple trolls who claim that everything I've
    said is from a "no nothing", bear in mind that I wrote this long ago.

    Heroics are possible, even with iOS, but you have to know "something". :)

    **************************************************************************** How to read/write access iOS file systems on Ubuntu/Windows over USB cable

    Please improve so that all benefit from your efforts. **************************************************************************** The purpose of this apnote is to test read/write access to non-jailbroken
    iOS devices over USB cable using a dual-boot Windows10/Ubuntu18.04 PC.

    The goal is read/write access to the iOS device's visible file system
    to *both* Windows & Ubuntu, via the Linux file explorer & command line.

    Note that the iTunes abomination will *never* be installed on these PCs!

    Both Windows and Linux are *native* (i.e., zero additional software is
    needed for full read/write access to the entire visible file system of
    the iOS device. Everything is on the native operating system!) ============================================================================ Section I: Native Ubuntu 18.04 Desktop ============================================================================
    0. Check what's installed natively when the iOS device is NOT connected:
    a. Boot to Ubuntu 18.04 Desktop <http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_ios000.jpg>
    b. Ensure ifuse and libimobiledevice-utils do not exist
    $ which ifuse
    (reports nothing)
    $ which ideviceinfo
    (reports nothing)
    c. Note that libimobiledevice is installed, by default
    $ sudo updateb
    $ locate libimobiledevice
    (reports stuff)

    Apparently libimobiledevice is native, but not ifuse, nor are the libimobiledevice-utils such as idevicepair & icevicesyslog, etc.

    $ ifuse
    Command 'ifuse' not found, but can be installed with:
    sudo apt install ifuse

    $ ideviceinfo
    Command 'ideviceinfo' not found, but can be installed with:
    sudo apt install libimobiledevice-utils ============================================================================
    1. Plug in an iOS device either before or after Ubuntu 18.04 has booted:
    a. When you plug in the iPad for the first time, the iPad will ask:
    "Trust this computer?"
    <http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_ios010.jpg>
    Note: You won't see this message again after the first time.
    Note that when you plug into Windows, you get a different message:
    "Allow this device to access photos and videos?" <http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_ios020.jpg>
    b. Notice two new icons show up on the desktop: <http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_ios030.jpg>
    - iPad [a digital SLR icon]
    (DCIM, read only, no thumbs)
    - Documents on myipad [a monitor & keyboard icon]
    (private space of the "good" apps, read/write, no thumbs) <http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_ios040.jpg>
    c. Notice there is no Downloads yet <http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_ios050.jpg>
    d. Notice there are no thumbnails yet <http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_ios060.jpg>
    e. Notice you can only read from the DCIM directory tree. <http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_ios070.jpg>
    f. Notice you can write to the private space of the good apps
    (Namely: Adobe Acrobat, Excel, FileExplorer, GarageBand,
    iMovie, Keynote, MFExplorer, MinimaList, NewsTapLite, Numbers,
    Pages, PowerPoint, QuickSupport, RManager, SMBManager, Topo Reader,
    VLC, Voice Recorder, WiFi HD, Word)
    <iosxxx>
    g. Determine your iOS device 40-hex-character serial number:
    $ dmesg|grep SerialNumber:
    SerialNumber: 6ee7ab2fa479394be85da7cb4aefc5d8b11b6f82
    <iosxxx>
    Note:
    Rightclick in the VLC directory & select "Open in Terminal".
    $ pwd
    /run/user/1000/gvfs/afc:hose=<40char>,port=3/org.videolan.vlc-ios <http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_ios170.jpg>

    Note: You can now copy any iOS device file over to Ubuntu or Windows.
    Caveat: See addendum on Ubuntu mounting of Windows partitions below. ============================================================================
    2. Determine the iOS name of the folders that you want read/write access
    to:
    a. Put your mouse cursor in "Documents on myipad" & press <Control+L> <http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_ios080.jpg>
    b. This reports the true path to the "Documents on myipad" folder: afc://6ee7ab2fa479394be85da7cb4aefc5d8b11b6f82 afc://<40-hex-character-unique-serial-number>:3/
    Note: If you put it in VLC you get afc://6ee7ab2fa479394be85da7cb4aefc5d8b11b6f82:3/org.videolan.vlc-ios
    c. Put your mouse cursor in DCIM and press control L
    d. This reports the true path to the "DCIM" folder: gphoto2://%5Busb%3A001,002%5D/DCIM
    Note: If you put it in 101Apple you get gphoto2://%5Busb%3A001,002%5D/DCIM/101APPLE

    Note: You can now copy any iOS device file over to Ubuntu or Windows.
    Caveat: See addendum on Ubuntu automounting of Windows partitions. ============================================================================
    3. Enable write access to both the DCIM & Downloads folders (among others):
    a. Remove the ":3/" and put it in the space that Control L was in. afc://6ee7ab2fa479394be85da7cb4aefc5d8b11b6f82
    b. Notice a *new* Desktop icon shows up, named "myipad".
    c. Notice you now have read/writeaccess to DCIM & Downloads (plus
    others).
    Namely: Books,DCIM,Downloads,iMazing,iTunes_Control,MediaAnalysis, PhotoData,Photos,PublicStaging,Purchases
    d. Notice that the "iPad" mount is still read only (which doesn't
    matter).
    e. Notice that you have no thumbnails anywhere.

    Note: Rightclick in the DCIM directory & select "Open in Terminal".
    $ pwd
    /run/user/1000/gvfs/gphoto2:hose=%5Busb%3A001%2C002%5D/DCIM

    Note: You can now copy any iOS device file over to Ubuntu or Windows.
    Caveat: See addendum on Ubuntu mounting of Windows partitions below. ============================================================================ Section II: Adding ifuse & libimobiledevice-info to Ubuntu 18.04 Desktop

    NOTE: This is optional! Adding these only adds minor capabilities that
    wasn't already in the native operating system commands above. ============================================================================
    4. Install the ifuse iOS file system to run in the background on Ubuntu: <http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_ios100.jpg>
    a. Optionally, update and upgrade your system:
    $ sudo apt update && sudo apt upgrade <http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_ios090.jpg>
    b. Install the ifuse iOS file system on Ubuntu:
    $ sudo apt install ifuse
    c. Look at the ifuse help <http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_ios110.jpg>
    $ which ifuse
    /usr/bin/ifuse
    $ ifuse --help
    Usage: ifuse MOUNTPOINT [OPTIONS]
    Mount directories of an iOS device locally using fuse.
    -o === mount options
    -u === mount specific device by its 40-digit device UDID
    -d === enable libimobiledevice communication debugging
    -- root === mount root file system (jailbroken device required)
    -- documents APPID === mount 'Documents' folder of identified app
    -- container APPID === mount sandbox root of identified app ============================================================================
    5. EXAMPLE 1: Mount the entire iOS visible file system on Ubuntu: <http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_ios120.jpg>
    a. Create a mount point directory for your iOS files
    $ mkdir -p $HOME/data/iosfs
    b. Access the iOS device via $HOME/data/iosfs
    $ ifuse $HOME/data/iosfs
    c. This immediately puts an "iosfs" icon on the Desktop.
    d. Notice you have write access to the iOS Downloads & DCIM (& others).
    Namely: Books,DCIM,Downloads,iMazing,iTunes_Control,MediaAnalysis, PhotoData,Photos,PublicStaging,Purchases <http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_ios130.jpg> <http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_ios140.jpg> <http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_ios150.jpg>
    e. Notice you now have thumbnails.
    f. Notice you have all the power of Linux, on your iOS device now.

    To unmount:
    $ fusermount -u $HOME/data/iosfs ============================================================================
    6. EXAMPLE 2: Mount the iOS device by its unique 40-hex-character UDID:
    a. Copy the serial number into your buffer
    $ dmesg | grep SerialNumber:
    b. Mount the iOS device by that serial number UDID
    $ mkdir $HOME/data/ipad
    $ ifuse $HOME/data/ipad -u 6ee7ab2fa479394be85da7cb4aefc5d8b11b6f82
    c. This immediately puts an "iosfs" icon on the Desktop.
    d. Notice you have write access to the iOS Downloads & DCIM (& others).
    Namely: Books,DCIM,Downloads,iMazing,iTunes_Control,MediaAnalysis, PhotoData,Photos,PublicStaging,Purchases
    e. Notice you now have thumbnails.
    f. Notice you have all the power of Linux, on your iOS device now.

    To unmount:
    $ fusermount -u $HOME/data/ipad ============================================================================
    7. EXAMPLE 3: Mount an iOS application's "documents" folder by its APPID: <http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_ios160.jpg>
    $ mkdir $HOME/data/vlc_documents
    $ ifuse $HOME/data/vlc_documents --documents org.videolan.vlc-ios

    This puts an icon named "vlc_documents" on your desktop, which is
    read/write access, with thumbnails, to the iOS VLC documents directory. <http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_ios180.jpg>

    To unmount:
    $ fusermount -u $HOME/data/vlc_documents ============================================================================
    8. Install libimobiledevice-utils:
    $ sudo apt install libimobiledevice-utils ============================================================================
    9. EXAMPLE 4:
    $ ideviceinfo -d
    REPORTS copious information about that connected iOS device.

    $ idevicesyslog
    REPORTS the system log of the iOS device (extremely verbose output!). ============================================================================ 10. Please suggest further useful examples based on your experiences. ============================================================================ Caveat:

    If you leave Windows 10 at the default setting of fast startup,
    then Ubuntu will mount the entire Windows file system as read only
    (apparently because fast startup is a form of hibernation).

    To automatically mount the entire Windows filesystem as read/write,
    simply turn off fast startup in the Windows 10 settings:

    Start > Settings > System > Power & sleep > Related settings
    Additional power settings > Choose what the power button does >
    or (depending on your number of buttons)
    Additional power settings > Choose what the power buttons do >
    Change settings that are currently unavailable

    Change from:
    [x]Turn on fast startup (recommended)
    This helps start your PC faster after shutdown. Restart isn't affected. [x]Sleep (Show in Power menu.)
    [_]Hibernate (Show in Power menu.)
    [x]Hibernate (Show in Power menu.)
    [x]Lock (Show in account picture menu.)

    Change to:
    [_]Turn on fast startup (recommended)
    This helps start your PC faster after shutdown. Restart isn't affected. [_]Sleep (Show in Power menu.)
    [_]Hibernate (Show in Power menu.)
    [_]Hibernate (Show in Power menu.)
    [_]Lock (Show in account picture menu.)

    And then press the "Save changes" button. ============================================================================ ============================================================================

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Hank Rogers@21:1/5 to Marion on Wed Apr 9 17:39:59 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    Marion wrote:
    On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 09:45:51 +1200, Your Name wrote :


    simply a brainless anti-Apple know-nothing troll.

    These are technical newsgroups... and this is a technical subject.

    The adults will notice we're talking how iOS is different from all other operating systems, e.g., an app backup is essentially impossible on iOS.

    And yet, the Apple trolls (like Your Name) hate that we're discussing this technical feature of iOS which - let's face it - is unique among systems.

    Only Apple doesn't allow iOS users the common decency of an app backup.
    The only thing Apple allows the poor iOS user to back up is the app data.

    But not the app.
    And that's bad.



    So, why does this matter, Arlen? When you do a restore on an apple
    gadget (Iphone, Ipad, etc), it downloads the latest version from the
    apple "store". And since it DOES save the app's data, that will put
    things back exactly as they were.

    Only exception is if you were using an old version, no longer offered on
    the "store" ... then you're just fucked.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Marion@21:1/5 to Hank Rogers on Thu Apr 10 08:02:11 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 17:39:59 -0500, Hank Rogers wrote :


    So, why does this matter? When you do a restore on an apple
    gadget (Iphone, Ipad, etc), it downloads the latest version from the
    apple "store". And since it DOES save the app's data, that will put
    things back exactly as they were.

    Only exception is if you were using an old version, no longer offered on
    the "store" ... then you're just fucked.

    Why does it matter? Are you nuts? It's extremely important to back up apps.

    Think about what Windows?Android/Linux users would say if you told them
    it's impossible for them to back up their saved program installers.

    I must have half a dozen (at least) last known good versions on my PC.
    And a few on Android.

    Only Apple makes it impossible for the user to back up their installers.
    Nobody else but Apple users would put up with that crap.

    Quiz:

    Q: *Which common consumer operating system makes app backups impossible?*
    A:
    a. Apple iOS
    b. Microsoft Windows
    c. Android
    *YOU MUST PICK ONE!*

    Q: Which user base is timid sheep who would accept that horrid restriction?
    A: (see above)
    --
    It's amazing how primitive subterranean caverns are in the Apple ecosystem.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Carlos E.R.@21:1/5 to Marion on Thu Apr 10 13:06:14 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On 2025-04-10 10:02, Marion wrote:
    On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 17:39:59 -0500, Hank Rogers wrote :


    So, why does this matter? When you do a restore on an apple
    gadget (Iphone, Ipad, etc), it downloads the latest version from the
    apple "store". And since it DOES save the app's data, that will put
    things back exactly as they were.

    Only exception is if you were using an old version, no longer offered on
    the "store" ... then you're just fucked.

    Why does it matter? Are you nuts? It's extremely important to back up apps.

    Think about what Windows?Android/Linux users would say if you told them
    it's impossible for them to back up their saved program installers.

    Ok, I understand your point. However, I don't do backups/restore on
    Android either. I simply let Google Play reinstall everything in the
    list. This is what most people do.

    I do make backups. That is, I connect the phone to the Linux computer
    (some how, the method varies) and copy every file in sight. Some files
    refuse to be copied, though. And this allows me to do a data restore of
    some apps. Applies specially to photos and maybe to WhatsApp.

    But a true backup/restore strategy like I have on Windows or Linux? Nope.



    About Android saving the APK. I have never used that to reinstall an
    app. In fact, there are cleaning utilities that delete the old APKs to
    make up free space.

    --
    Cheers, Carlos.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Marion@21:1/5 to Carlos E.R. on Thu Apr 10 19:10:02 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 13:06:14 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote :


    Think about what Windows?Android/Linux users would say if you told them
    it's impossible for them to back up their saved program installers.

    Ok, I understand your point.

    Hi Carlos,

    Thank you for understanding that what iOS users put up with in the
    subterranean caves called the "ecosystem", nobody else would accept.

    On iOS, an app backup is impossible.
    That's bad.

    However, I don't do backups/restore on Android either.

    An example is I have the last known good version of Paint Shop Pro on
    Windows, which, if it were iOS, would be *impossible* to have saved.

    On iOS, installing the last known good version of anything is impossible. That's bad.

    I simply let Google Play reinstall everything in the
    list.

    On all my Android devices, I have the last known good version of PulseSMS, which, let's just say, is the best SMS/MMS messenger on the planet (IMHO).

    Since PulseSMS was bought by MapleMedia, I use the last known good version.
    <https://tinyurl.com/pulsesms> LNGV

    Installing a lastknowngoodversion on your iOS devices would be impossible. That's bad.

    This is what most people do.

    There are a lot of people who have older (non-subscription) versions of Microsoft Office which install just fine on each of their Windows PCs.

    If their PC were iOS, installing that old MS Office would be impossible.
    That's bad.

    I do make backups.

    I have a backup of my Adobe Acrobat Professional version 6 on my PC.
    I've installed it on every PC in my household for, oh, maybe 15 years.

    If my PCs were iOS, installing that older version would be impossible.
    That's bad.

    That is, I connect the phone to the Linux computer
    (some how, the method varies) and copy every file in sight.

    It's amazing how well Linux works when you connect even an iOS device.
    <https://i.postimg.cc/Jhmy9KH7/files06.jpg> Ubuntu iFuse is just magical

    Linux has "iFuse" which allows very easy file transfer from iOS also.
    <https://i.postimg.cc/s2x0f9Js/files14.jpg> Linux, win10 & iOS together

    Linux works great with iFuse!
    That's good.

    Some files refuse to be copied, though.

    There are partitions in Android that are NOT readable to the 0 user.

    An example is /etc, but even system partitions are accessible to adb.
    adb pull /system/etc/hosts .\hosts.txt
    [That should copy the hosts file over even if you're unrooted.]

    And this allows me to do a data restore of some apps.

    Understood that restoring data to some apps can be tricky because of the Android sandboxing - and due to whether an APK is "debuggable" or not.

    Android 12 and up is much harder to access non-debuggable app sandboxes.

    Applies specially to photos and maybe to WhatsApp.

    There's a user-accessible folder for WhatsApp that has all the media, but I haven't checked if there's a user-accessible folder for all the messages.

    But a true backup/restore strategy like I have on Windows or Linux?
    Nope.

    With adb, you can backup/restore all your APKs with a single command.

    Here's the command to backup a single APK for example.
    adb pull $(adb shell pm path com.app) .

    It's getting increasingly difficult with each Android version for data.
    adb backup -apk com.your.app.package -f mydata.ab


    Note: You can't selectively choose which data within the app's sandbox to
    back up using this method. It's an all-or-nothing approach (if allowed).

    In Muntashirakon, you can check if the flags allow backup of the data.
    android:allowBackup="false"

    For every app that allows backup, you can back up the app & data en masse. (using adb backup -apk -noshared -all) resulting in an archive (.ab file).

    Then you can restore the app and the app data from that complete backup.
    adb restore com.app.ab


    About Android saving the APK.

    What's unique about Android is if the app is installed (either by the OEM
    or by the carrier or by you) the APK *will always be saved* automatically.

    That's good.

    I have never used that to reinstall an app.

    And, you can find & backup that original installer *in every single case*!

    adb shell pm list packages | findstr osmand (or use grep on Linux)
    package:net.osmand.plus

    In fact, there are cleaning utilities that delete the old APKs to
    make up free space.

    No they don't. Not unless you're rooted.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Carlos E.R.@21:1/5 to Marion on Thu Apr 10 21:35:37 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On 2025-04-10 21:10, Marion wrote:

    ...

    In fact, there are cleaning utilities that delete the old APKs to
    make up free space.
    No they don't. Not unless you're rooted.

    AFAIK the old ES Explorer or ES Admin did. The app was removed from the
    store, they did bad and illegal things, but I still have some old
    version in an old phone (decommissioned, no SIM).

    --
    Cheers, Carlos.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Marion@21:1/5 to Carlos E.R. on Thu Apr 10 23:15:14 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 21:35:37 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote :


    In fact, there are cleaning utilities that delete the old APKs to
    make up free space.
    No they don't. Not unless you're rooted.

    AFAIK the old ES Explorer or ES Admin did. The app was removed from the store, they did bad and illegal things, but I still have some old
    version in an old phone (decommissioned, no SIM).

    I know. We all used that same crap cleaner (just as we did on Windows
    before CCleaner got bought over by the dark side) and just as MapleMedia
    bought the KlinkerBros' PulseSMS messenger, some swing to the dark side.

    As far as I'm aware, nowadays, Android doesn't let you delete that APK that Android itself stores in the privileged areas of the Android file system.

    Anyway, the main point (of this good/bad) thread is that iOS is unique not
    only in NOT letting you re-use your free apps, but iOS is also unique in
    that iOS won't ever even let you back them up.

    That's bad.
    Who puts up with an operating system that forbids app backups?

    Most people don't know this - but we're technical people who need to know.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Arno Welzel@21:1/5 to All on Fri Apr 11 09:31:39 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    Marion, 2025-04-09 22:03:

    On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 12:37:51 +0200, Arno Welzel wrote :


    This is very bad manners.

    Speaking of bad manners, the point of this offshoot is about good & bad. >>>
    1. Only iOS *locks* every installer to a specific unique ID.
    2. This is bad for two reasons, one of which is it prevents reuse.

    Which is irrelevant for most cases, since installer files can not just
    be copied from one iPhone to another anyway.

    The main point is that only Apple locks every IPA to a specific user.
    And that's bad.

    Which does not change, that you can not copy installer files from one
    iOS device to another anyway.


    --
    Arno Welzel
    https://arnowelzel.de

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Arno Welzel@21:1/5 to All on Fri Apr 11 09:36:39 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    Marion, 2025-04-09 22:43:

    On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 12:35:58 +0200, Arno Welzel wrote :


    The *reason* you can't re-use Apple IPAs is Apple locks the downloaded
    software to a specific unique Apple ID so that it can only be installed on >>> devices with that specific unique Apple ID.

    Yes - so what? Nobody will or can even copy installer files from one
    iPhone or iPad to another to get them re-used with a different Apple ID.

    What we're all trying to do is learn how the various systems work.

    The original question was what was *different* & whether it was good or
    bad, where what's different with iOS is Apple locks every installer to you.

    Yes - and?

    If you can not copy installer files anyway, what's the matter then if
    they get bound to a specific AppleID?

    If you happen to have installed on your Android the last known good version of any given app, you can re-install that app on *billions* of Androids.

    Yes, *if* you have the APK files. Google Play itself does not provide
    the option to install older versions - you can only download the latest
    version of an app which available for your device. And if your device is
    too old some apps may even not be available any longer, because the
    publishers decided not to support older Android versions etc.

    The point not being the sheer number but the fact it's unrestricted re-use. However... that same scenario won't work for iOS owners. And that's bad.

    For iOS owners many other things don't work the same way. If you don't
    like that, just don't use it. Problem solved.

    Even an iTunes "backup" of that last known good version of an app does not contain a re-usable IPA to that last known good version of that iOS app.

    Yes, the same as in Android. Android backups do not backup everything
    and apps installer files will not be backed up at all, just the list
    which app should be installed.

    The app backup only contains garbage such as meta data & app data.
    But the app backup (even with iTunes) does NOT contain the full ipa file.

    The same applies to Android.

    The Apple user is always fucked by Apple.

    Every other operating system allows the user to re-install the last known good version after a factory reset (or crash, or whatever)... except Apple.

    Nope. Android does not allow to do this either if you do not manually
    extract APK files. And even then you can not be sure of the APK file
    works on another device because the publisher uses AAB for publishing.


    --
    Arno Welzel
    https://arnowelzel.de

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Arno Welzel@21:1/5 to All on Fri Apr 11 09:39:48 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    Marion, 2025-04-09 22:58:

    On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 12:31:12 +0200, Arno Welzel wrote :


    There is free open source software which does not cost money but when
    distributed by the Apple App Store, it's locked to a specific Apple ID.

    Which is irrelevant, since you can just download it again, if needed.

    People on this newsgroup are supposed to understand that which they claim.

    I don't think you yet understand that your statement is patently false.
    Since these are technical newsgroups, it behooves you to understand iOS.

    Let's take a simple example that has happened to all of us at some point.
    a. Let's say you've got a free app on Windows, iOS and Android;
    b. Let's say the "latest version" is not the "last known good version";
    c. Let's say you've been diligent with the backups on all 3 platforms.

    Sounds great so far, right?
    Now... let's say something unforeseen happens & you do a factory reset.

    Now what?
    Please answer the question below.

    Q: What happens on each operating system with respect to the re-install?
    Choice A. You're fucked on iOS.

    Irrelevant, since you can not backup and transfer app installer files
    anyway.

    Choice B. You're fucked on iOS, but you're fine on Android.

    No, since Android does not allow that either when using Google Play.

    Choice C. You're fucked on iOS, but you're fine on Windows.

    No, since Windows does not allow that either when using Microsoft Store.

    Please do not confuse manual hacks with official ways how to install "Apps".

    Please choose any of the above which apply to that common situation.
    You must choose at least one, where the best answer is choose all three.

    All three are wrong or irrelevant.

    --
    Arno Welzel
    https://arnowelzel.de

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Marion@21:1/5 to Arno Welzel on Fri Apr 11 08:57:19 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On Fri, 11 Apr 2025 09:31:39 +0200, Arno Welzel wrote :


    The main point is that only Apple locks every IPA to a specific user.
    And that's bad.

    Which does not change, that you can not copy installer files from one
    iOS device to another anyway.

    You are correct. Thank you for clarifying your position based on logic.

    Since I'm always logical and sensibly reasonable, I agree with your
    assessment that it doesn't really matter (for purposes of re-use) that
    Apple locks every installer file uniquely to your Apple ID - but the reason
    it doesn't matter is ironic - because the reason is that Apple *already*
    made re-use impossible (with or without the insertion of your unique ID!).

    So we would likely agree that Apple made it *doubly impossible* for reuse.
    1. Apple inserts a non-reusable ID into every installer
    2. At the same time that Apple disallows backup of every installer
    3. Hence, free app installer re-use is *doubly impossible*!

    But it is what Apple uses to track you which no other operating system can
    do (because no other system inserts your unique tracker into every app).

    Both of which are bad.
    --
    The best way to visualize Apple's locked ecosystem is to think of it as a subterranean cavern with passageways to itself but few to the real world.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Marion@21:1/5 to Arno Welzel on Fri Apr 11 09:45:11 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On Fri, 11 Apr 2025 09:39:48 +0200, Arno Welzel wrote :


    Please choose any of the above which apply to that common situation.
    You must choose at least one, where the best answer is choose all three.

    All three are wrong or irrelevant.

    See my prior response, where I happen to back up *all* my Windows & Android installers (every single installer version is backed up automatically).

    Here's my backup of Windows installers (this is just one folder):
    <https://i.postimg.cc/jSNb7bkF/pspdf.jpg> backup of all my ps & pdf installers

    Here's my backup of all my Android installers.
    <https://i.postimg.cc/cJQPvngN/aurora09.jpg> don't delete the APK after installing it

    Here's my backup of all my iOS installers.
    <null set>

    The technical issue we're answering in this thread is what's *unique* about
    the various platforms, and whether that uniqueness is good or bad overall.

    The fact that it's impossible to back up all your iOS installers is unique.
    And that's bad.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Marion@21:1/5 to Arno Welzel on Fri Apr 11 09:29:00 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    On Fri, 11 Apr 2025 09:36:39 +0200, Arno Welzel wrote :


    The original question was what was *different* & whether it was good or
    bad, where what's different with iOS is Apple locks every installer to you.

    Yes - and?

    If you can not copy installer files anyway, what's the matter then if
    they get bound to a specific AppleID?

    You bring up a logical assessment which I appreciate that you explained.
    Since I'm always sensible and logical, I fully agree with your point.

    Given Apple *already* prevents you from ever backing up any iOS installer,
    your point is that it's immaterial that Apple *also* locks it to your ID.

    (See caveat in the sig.)

    However, it still matters that Apple tracks you by that unique insertion.

    If you happen to have installed on your Android the last known good version >> of any given app, you can re-install that app on *billions* of Androids.

    Yes, *if* you have the APK files.

    Again I appreciate that you explain details that both of us are aware of,
    but which the vast majority of people out there probably do not know.

    We both agree that Google began requiring all new apps to be published
    using the Android App Bundle (AAB) format on August 1, 2021.

    Luckily, all my last known good versions date from well before then.
    But to your point, if my last known good version dates from *after* that period, and if I received my app from the Google Play Store repository,
    then (and only then) would the base APK that is always stored on Android,
    not be able to be put onto every Android device on the planet.

    For example a base APK on my Samsung Galaxy (if downloaded after August
    2021) would likely only work on hardware/software compatible devices.

    Google Play itself does not provide
    the option to install older versions - you can only download the latest version of an app which available for your device.

    You are correct that Google Play doesn't allow the option of installing
    older versions, but when you use the Google Play Store open source
    replacement apps, they automatically save *every* version you installed. <https://i.postimg.cc/c4PrjSwx/aurora19.jpg> Save all APKs during install

    The ironic thing is that Google Play could do it too, if it wanted to,
    since all the Google Play replacement app is doing is NOT DELETING it.
    <https://i.postimg.cc/Z5kdD2rg/aurora04.jpg> APKs autosaved to sdcard

    This is why I have *thousands* of APKs stored automatically on Windows.
    <https://i.postimg.cc/cJQPvngN/aurora09.jpg> Aurora saves all APKs

    And if your device is
    too old some apps may even not be available any longer, because the publishers decided not to support older Android versions etc.

    While I agree with you, that's why you autosave every APK you install!

    You can grab them and just slide them over to the phone to install them!
    <https://i.postimg.cc/wvsbcNBz/scrcpy05.jpg> Drag APK from Windows

    The point not being the sheer number but the fact it's unrestricted re-use. >> However... that same scenario won't work for iOS owners. And that's bad.

    For iOS owners many other things don't work the same way.
    If you don't like that, just don't use it. Problem solved.

    I must disagree with your attitude that you feel there's no reason to understand anything that you simply happen to not like how it works.

    The fact is we're discussing HOW things work & what's good/bad about it.
    I didn't start this thread topic. I am merely answering the question asked.

    Your admonition that if you don't like something, then you have no right to explain how that something works, is not an attitude that I share with you.

    Even an iTunes "backup" of that last known good version of an app does not >> contain a re-usable IPA to that last known good version of that iOS app.

    Yes, the same as in Android. Android backups do not backup everything
    and apps installer files will not be backed up at all, just the list
    which app should be installed.

    While I understand what you claimed, most people will believe your words as stated to mean more than what you meant them to mean, so that's a problem.

    The fact is Android already automatically saves every APK you install.
    That base.apk is *always* there. All you have to do is copy it to the PC.

    @echo off
    echo Getting list of installed packages...
    adb shell pm list packages -f > packages.txt
    echo Extracting APK paths and pulling files...
    for /F "tokens=1* delims=:" %%A in ('type packages.txt') DO (
    if "%%A"=="package" (
    for /F "tokens=1 delims== " %%C in ("%%B") DO (
    echo Pulling "%%C"
    adb pull "%%C" "Pulled_APKs\"
    )
    )
    )
    echo Done. APKs have been pulled to the "Pulled_APKs" folder.
    del packages.txt
    pause

    But what you're saying is that the user has to think to do that.
    And I agree with that sentiment. Backup strategies have to be planned.

    The app backup only contains garbage such as meta data & app data.
    But the app backup (even with iTunes) does NOT contain the full ipa file.

    The same applies to Android.

    That statement is not correct since the Android base apk is always there.
    There are *plenty* of APK extractors on Android which back up the APKs.

    Here's one from my own notes when I used to extract all the Android APKs.
    ML Manager: APK Extractor Javier Santos V
    4.0 star 3.35K reviews 500K+ Downloads
    <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.javiersantos.mlmanager>
    <https://about.javiersantos.me/mlmanager/>
    <https://github.com/javiersantos/MLManager>
    Files stored by default in internal
    MLManager: Settings > Custom folder for extracted APKs
    Default: /storage/emulated/0/Android/media/com.javiersantos.mlmanager
    It doesn't seem to be able to put them on the sdcard automatically.
    Custom: /storage/0000-0001/0001/apk/mlmanager <== does not work
    Custom: /storage/emulated/0/0000/apk/mlmanager <== works

    Every other operating system allows the user to re-install the last known
    good version after a factory reset (or crash, or whatever)... except Apple.

    Nope. Android does not allow to do this either if you do not manually
    extract APK files. And even then you can not be sure of the APK file
    works on another device because the publisher uses AAB for publishing.

    We agree that the average user doesn't know what we know so that average
    user might not know how to easily back up all the Android APKs like we do.

    But that doesn't change the facts as presented in this thread that with
    iOS, it's impossible to back up the IPA installer for almost any user.

    And that's bad.
    --
    Note: There are IPA installers you can back up & which there isn't a unique
    ID but those are mostly used in the corporate world & Apple restricts them differently. We're mainly discussing the common user in this thread.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Arno Welzel@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 13 14:07:32 2025
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.os.linux, comp.mobile.android

    Marion, 2025-04-11 11:29:

    On Fri, 11 Apr 2025 09:36:39 +0200, Arno Welzel wrote :
    [...]
    Yes, *if* you have the APK files.

    Again I appreciate that you explain details that both of us are aware of,
    but which the vast majority of people out there probably do not know.

    We both agree that Google began requiring all new apps to be published
    using the Android App Bundle (AAB) format on August 1, 2021.

    JFTR: I am an app publisher myself. So if I write about Android, keep in
    mind that I develop software for it ;-)

    My private "pet project" there (beside professional apps which are
    provided for our customers):

    <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=de.arnowelzel.android.periodical>

    [...]
    I must disagree with your attitude that you feel there's no reason to understand anything that you simply happen to not like how it works.

    The normal user can do what he wants and use alternative app stores,
    additional tools, backup APK files.

    But this is more or less futile. Older app versions may also contain
    security issues - and this is also a reason *not* to use that, just
    because you can.

    And if any user complains, that an old version of my app does not work
    as expected I will of course tell them to use the latest version since I
    do *not* support older versions. And if the new version does not work on his/her device any longer - bad luck. I can not support devices which
    are 8 years or older.

    [...]
    Your admonition that if you don't like something, then you have no right to explain how that something works, is not an attitude that I share with you.

    Where did I do that???

    I just said, that if you don't like a system as it works, then don't use it.

    [...]
    Yes, the same as in Android. Android backups do not backup everything
    and apps installer files will not be backed up at all, just the list
    which app should be installed.

    While I understand what you claimed, most people will believe your words as stated to mean more than what you meant them to mean, so that's a problem.

    The fact is Android already automatically saves every APK you install.

    But not as part of a backup!

    That base.apk is *always* there. All you have to do is copy it to the PC.

    Sure - but you have to do that manually.

    @echo off
    echo Getting list of installed packages...
    adb shell pm list packages -f > packages.txt

    Good luck explaining non tech-savvy users how to get "adb" in their
    console and how to use a console at all.

    [..]
    The app backup only contains garbage such as meta data & app data.
    But the app backup (even with iTunes) does NOT contain the full ipa file. >>
    The same applies to Android.

    That statement is not correct since the Android base apk is always there.

    Wrong. The DEFAULT ANDROID BACKUP DONE BY GOOGLE ITSELF does not contain
    it! If you move to a NEW DEVICE the BACKUP will NOT contain the APK for it!


    --
    Arno Welzel
    https://arnowelzel.de

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