As per usual your understanding of iOS is lacking. There is no such restriction.
I use "LAN Drive Samba server" and these are the server settings: https://i.postimg.cc/8CK3h4bT/IMG-6999.jpg
Works just fine.
On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 06:35:09 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote :
I use "LAN Drive Samba server" and these are the server settings:
https://i.postimg.cc/8CK3h4bT/IMG-6999.jpg
Works just fine.
There's something "wrong" with that assumption that it's using 445 since that's impossible (as far as I understand iOS). So if it is acting as an SMBv2 server, then it must be redirecting the port to something above 1024.
On 2025-04-16 08:44, Marion wrote:
On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 06:35:09 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote :
I use "LAN Drive Samba server" and these are the server settings:
https://i.postimg.cc/8CK3h4bT/IMG-6999.jpg
Works just fine.
There's something "wrong" with that assumption that it's using 445 since
that's impossible (as far as I understand iOS). So if it is acting as an
SMBv2 server, then it must be redirecting the port to something above
1024.
From the screenshot ...
    Server //localhost
    IP //192.168.1.24
... which are mutually contradictory, because ...
    localhost
... should be ...
    127.0.0.1
... so either that settings page doesn't reflect reality, or something
else is going on to make it all work.
On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 06:35:09 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote :
As per usual your understanding of iOS is lacking. There is no such
restriction.
Unlike the Apple trolls, I'm happy if I'm wrong because then I learn something. See below. I saw your screenshot. But it's my understanding that iOS (& Android) do not support ports below 1024 for non-jailbroken devices.
The knowledge exists in the behavior of the operating system itself.
The record on the Internet shows if an iOS app developer attempts to bind
to a port below 1024, the operating system will return an error.
On 2025-04-16 08:44, Marion wrote:
On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 06:35:09 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote :
I use "LAN Drive Samba server" and these are the server settings:
https://i.postimg.cc/8CK3h4bT/IMG-6999.jpg
Works just fine.
There's something "wrong" with that assumption that it's using 445 since
that's impossible (as far as I understand iOS). So if it is acting as an
SMBv2 server, then it must be redirecting the port to something above 1024.
From the screenshot ...
Server //localhost
IP //192.168.1.24
... which are mutually contradictory, because ...
localhost
... should be ...
127.0.0.1
... so either that settings page doesn't reflect reality, or something
else is going on to make it all work.
Marion <marion@facts.com> wrote:
On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 06:35:09 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote :
As per usual your understanding of iOS is lacking. There is no such
restriction.
Unlike the Apple trolls, I'm happy if I'm wrong because then I learn
something.
Let's see...
See below. I saw your screenshot. But it's my understanding that
iOS (& Android) do not support ports below 1024 for non-jailbroken devices.
...and yet your default position is to not believe your eyes. Your
happiness to be wrong is not looking so likely...
However, while I saw your screenshot, bear in mind that it's still my
understanding iOS doesn't allow users (non jailbroken) to use <1024 ports. >> *iOS Binding UDP sockets where port<1024?*
<https://stackoverflow.com/questions/4484394/binding-udp-sockets-where-port1024>
Let me get this right. You believe a 14 yo SO post over evidence I
presented yesterday? Wasn't that your exact criticism of the evidence Alan provided? Why such a hypocrite?
Unfortunately, Apple does not seem to have a direct statement confirming
this restriction. However, based on Unix-based security policies, it is
generally understood that iOS does not allow non-root apps to bind to ports >> below 1024. Only Bonjour/mDNS can use a port below 1024 (AFAIK).
Unfortunately, you can't even do the simple thing of trying it out
yourself. You prefer to - desperately - google the internet to death.
I use "LAN Drive Samba server" and these are the server settings:
https://i.postimg.cc/8CK3h4bT/IMG-6999.jpg
Works just fine.
There's something "wrong" with that assumption that it's using 445 since
that's impossible (as far as I understand iOS). So if it is acting as an
SMBv2 server, then it must be redirecting the port to something above 1024.
Why *must* it? Is this you happily accepting you're wrong?
The simple way to test it is just connect to 192.168.1.24:445. Guess what?
It works.
As far as I know, these are SMBv3 servers on iOS, which, as far as I know
Isn't very far.
Why not just try it yourself? What are you afraid of?
... so either that settings page doesn't reflect reality, or something
else is going on to make it all work.
Server //localhost
IP //192.168.1.24
Apologies, minor transcription error, slashes should be backward, not forward.
Being wrong, of course. Among his other shitty traits
Nah, you just don't understand what you are looking at
... so either that settings page doesn't reflect reality, or something
else is going on to make it all work.
I only used the IP address as you're right localhost on the client would
not find the SMB server.
The simple way to test it is just connect to 192.168.1.24:445.
Guess what?
It works.
net use Z: \\192.168.1.25:445\SharedFiles /user:chris mypasswd(Assuming the iOS/Android device is at 192.168.1.25 of course).
net use Z: \\192.168.1.25:445\SharedFiles /user:chris mypasswd
net use Z: \\192.168.1.25:5000\SharedFiles /user:chris mypasswd
On 16 Apr 2025 18:21:05 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote :
Nah, you just don't understand what you are looking at
This is what Jolly Roger is claiming happens with iOS.
socket = create_socket()
socket.bind(192.168.1.24, 445)
socket.listen_for_connections()
But that's not happening (AFAICT) on unjailbroken iOS devices.
On 16 Apr 2025 19:08:27 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote :
Being wrong, of course. Among his other shitty traits
I don't mind being wrong
Marion <marion@facts.com> wrote:
On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 13:02:04 +0100, Java Jive wrote :
    Server //localhost
    IP //192.168.1.24
Apologies, minor transcription error, slashes should be backward, not
forward.
Thanks for trying to help. Almost nobody appears to understand how this
works since iOS/Android can't possibly bind to ports below 1024 (AFAIK).
It's hilarious that you're ascribing an Android limitation to iOS where
none exists.
Not only can iOS bind port 445, it DOES. With evidence.
You're blinded by your dogmatism.
On 2025-04-17 21:38, Chris wrote:
Marion <marion@facts.com> wrote:
On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 13:02:04 +0100, Java Jive wrote :
    Server //localhost
    IP //192.168.1.24
Apologies, minor transcription error, slashes should be backward, not
forward.
Thanks for trying to help. Almost nobody appears to understand how this
works since iOS/Android can't possibly bind to ports below 1024 (AFAIK).
It's hilarious that you're ascribing an Android limitation to iOS where
none exists.
Not only can iOS bind port 445, it DOES. With evidence.
You're blinded by your dogmatism.
AFAIK all systems require privileges be given *somehow* to an
application in order to bind to a port below 1024. This is traditional.
On 2025-04-17 21:38, Chris wrote:
Marion <marion@facts.com> wrote:
On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 13:02:04 +0100, Java Jive wrote :
     Server //localhost
     IP //192.168.1.24
Apologies, minor transcription error, slashes should be backward, not
forward.
Thanks for trying to help. Almost nobody appears to understand how this
works since iOS/Android can't possibly bind to ports below 1024 (AFAIK).
It's hilarious that you're ascribing an Android limitation to iOS where
none exists.
Not only can iOS bind port 445, it DOES. With evidence.
You're blinded by your dogmatism.
AFAIK all systems require privileges be given *somehow* to an
application in order to bind to a port below 1024. This is traditional.
On 2025-04-16 08:44, Marion wrote:
On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 06:35:09 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote :
I use "LAN Drive Samba server" and these are the server settings:
https://i.postimg.cc/8CK3h4bT/IMG-6999.jpg
Works just fine.
There's something "wrong" with that assumption that it's using 445 since
that's impossible (as far as I understand iOS). So if it is acting as an
SMBv2 server, then it must be redirecting the port to something above
1024.
From the screenshot ...
    Server //localhost
    IP //192.168.1.24
... which are mutually contradictory, because ...
    localhost
... should be ...
    127.0.0.1
... so either that settings page doesn't reflect reality, or something
else is going on to make it all work.
On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 12:58:30 +0100, Java Jive wrote :
... so either that settings page doesn't reflect reality, or something
else is going on to make it all work.
I think much of what is in that screenshot is user editable, and the rest
is simply an abstraction, much like WebDAV appears to bind to port 80.
It's my understanding that neither Android nor iOS can bind to any ports below 1024 (we're always talking non rooted non jailbroken devices here).
On 16 Apr 2025 18:21:05 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote :
Nah, you just don't understand what you are looking at
This is what Jolly Roger is claiming happens with iOS.
socket = create_socket()
socket.bind(192.168.1.24, 445)
socket.listen_for_connections()
But that's not happening (AFAICT) on unjailbroken iOS devices.
AFAIK, when the iOS SMB server app tries to bind a socket to port 445,
the iOS would say "Nope. Ain't gonna do it. That's a privileged port."
Searching for how it works, it turns out apparently Windows includes a built-in always-on (by default) SMB client (srvsvc.dll). to test the SMB client on Windows, just open up a file explorer window and in the address line at top enter "\\localhost" (which sees SMB shares on your machine).
Apparently, when you enable Windows file sharing, you turn on the SMB
server (LanmanServer). An admin command line can see if it's running.
C:\Windows\system32> netstat -an | find "445"
C:\Windows\system32> netstat -an | find "139"
Now, Jolly Roger happens to be correct that I don't understand yet how it works, but here's my first pass at reasoning out how it "might" be working.
1. You are on iOS, using an SMB server app (not jailbroken)
2. You want to connect from iOS to a Windows SMB share
3. iOS apps cannot bind to or initiate from ports below 1024
4. And Windows doesn't know about your iOS device yet
5. The iOS SMB server likely uses a reverse proxy or system service
6. Which forwards traffic from port 445 to a higher port (like 5000)
7. Perhaps using mDNS (Bonjour) for seamless automatic service discovery
I'm working on understanding that process, where the whole point of this thread is to discuss, as adults, how this process really works.
Because the iOS/Android device is NOT binding to ports below 1024 (AFAIK).
On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 18:58:39 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote :
The simple way to test it is just connect to 192.168.1.24:445.
Guess what?
It works.
Hi Chris,
I asked this question because I am not a networking expert but I wanted to know the answer because it was/is my understanding that iOS/Android SMB servers cannot bind to ports below 1024 (unless jailbroken/rooted).
It's the right thing to do to ask the question of the experts here.
I appreciate that you tested the SMB client functionality on iOS.
I really do. I thank you for testing out that SMB client on iOS.
In fact, I'm sure your command above works, Chris, from iOS.
\\192.168.1.24:445
So we agree. Right?
The problem is, that command is, AFAICT, exercising the iOS SMB client.
Not the server.
We want iOS/Android to act as SMB servers.
Hence, this is the command I think you need to run to test out the server!
C:\> net use Z: \\192.168.1.25:445\SharedFiles /user:chris mypasswd
(Assuming the iOS/Android device is at 192.168.1.25 of course).
(Note that Bonjour/mDNS simplifies things but let's spell things out
because Bonjour can hide the hostname & port discovery process.)
When you run that command, do you see this Windows error Chris?
System error 53 has occurred.
The network path was not found.
If you do, that's too bad because we all want seamless file sharing
between Windows & iOS file systems (without third-party cloud services).
By setting up the iOS device as an SMB server, you're essentially turning
it into a small-scale NAS which allows seamless backups from iOS to the PC.
Hell, since an iOS/Android SMB server can host media files (e.g., videos, music, photos) we can stream content directly from iOS to Windows.
But what's gotta change, AFAIK, is you have to change the command, Chris:
Can you test these commands out please & let us know which one worked?
C:\> net use Z: \\192.168.1.25:445\SharedFiles /user:chris mypasswd
C:\> net use Z: \\192.168.1.25:5000\SharedFiles /user:chris mypasswd
I'm not a networking expert, so I ask the networking experts on this newsgroup if my hypothesis above makes sense enough to test it out?
On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 18:16:48 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote :
... so either that settings page doesn't reflect reality, or something
else is going on to make it all work.
I only used the IP address as you're right localhost on the client would
not find the SMB server.
Hi Chris,
I'm trying to figure out how this works given it's my understanding iOS & Android can't bind to ports below 1024 & yet Windows expects SMB on 445.
If we start with an iOS device running a just-installed SMB server app and
a typical Windows PC on the same local network, our goal is two tests:
A. From the iOS device, copy file "A" to Windows.
B. From the iOS device, retrieve file B from Windows
C. Using the SMB server on non-jailbroken iOS.
D. Even though iOS cannot bind to ports 445,139 (which SMB normally uses
E. But Windows (\\192.168.1.24) expects incoming SMB traffic on port 445
Right?
I think the "trick" is that the SMB server on iOS has an SMB client.
Which makes the copying of the files between iOS to Windows much easier.
(In fact, it's no different than what the iOS Files SMB client does.)
Here's what happens to copy a file A from iOS over to Windows:
1. You open the iOS SMB server app (which has an SMB client feature)
2. You enter the Windows machine's IP: \\192.168.1.24
3. iOS opens an outbound connection from a high port (e.g. 50632)
4. iOS opens that outbound connection to \\192.168.1.24:445
5. Windows is already listening on port 445 for incoming SMB
6. Windows sees the incoming request and begins the SMB handshake
7. Authentication occurs (guest or credentials)
8. iOS SMB app copies the file over to Windows
9. Communications flow using iOS port 50632 to Windows port 445
Now let's pull a file off the Windows machine:
10 iOS client requests File B from a shared folder on Windows.
11. Windows sends the file back over the same connection.
12. No privileged ports on the iOS side are needed for this direction.
But what if you want to use iOS as the SMB server, Chris?
Here is what I think may actually be happening in that rare case.
1. You launch the SMB server on iOS
2. Due to iOS restrictions, it can't use port 445 (AFAIK)
3. Instead, the iOS SMB server binds to a high port, like 5000
4. So now iOS is listening on 192.168.1.20:5000
5. In the Windows file explorer, you enter \\192.168.1.24:5000
6. The iOS app will accept SMB handshake traffic on port 5000
7. Windows SMB client opens a high outbound port (e.g., 51111)
8. The SMB handshake happens between iOS port 4000 & Windows 51111
9. The authentication also happens (guest or credentials)
10. Windows sends file B over port 51111 to the iOS SMB server
11. Which iOS receives on port 5000
12. And the iOS file system shows it as having been transferred
Notice in the case of the iOS Server, Windows must be told to connect to
iOS on that specific port, because it expects port 445 by default.
Where the advantage is if you have an SMB server on iOS...
a. You can drag files from Windows to your iPhone or iPad, and,
b. You can share files from iOS to a Windows machine on the same network,
c. Even when the iOS apps may be closed or running in the background.
I'm not a networking expert, so I ask the networking experts on this newsgroup if my hypothesis above makes sense enough to test it further?
Not only can iOS bind port 445, it DOES. With evidence.
On Thu, 17 Apr 2025 19:38:05 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote :
Not only can iOS bind port 445, it DOES. With evidence.
All I care about, Chris, is knowing the correct answer.
That's the reason I asked the question in the first place.
The problem is very few people here have any technical credibility
Least of all me. I never said I'm a networking expert.
On Thu, 17 Apr 2025 19:38:05 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote :
Not only can iOS bind port 445, it DOES. With evidence.
All I care about, Chris, is knowing the correct answer.
That's the reason I asked the question in the first place.
The problem is very few people here have any technical credibility.
Least of all me. I never said I'm a networking expert. Tyrone did.
I have had the free "LAN Drive - SMB Server" on my iPad since 2019.
<https://i.postimg.cc/8zk8s2mb/LANDRIVE-SMBSERVER01.jpg> Jan 24 2019
So I belatedly opened it up and read the documentation it presents.
<https://i.postimg.cc/7hgvTDRK/LANDRIVE-SMBSERVER02.jpg> LAN Drive Server
<https://i.postimg.cc/g0TbCgRH/LANDRIVE-SMBSERVER03.jpg> Allow Bonjour
<https://i.postimg.cc/SsHqMgxx/LANDRIVE-SMBSERVER04.jpg> Server Settings
<https://i.postimg.cc/MpYWF0d9/LANDRIVE-SMBSERVER05.jpg> Network Ports
<https://i.postimg.cc/wvvnFLGR/LANDRIVE-SMBSERVER06.jpg> Privileged Ports
It's still a bit confusing so to clear up the question once and for all, I took the liberty of asking the question of the developers on the XDA Forum site since the developers had linked to their XDA thread in the iOS app.
<https://xdaforums.com/t/app-4-0-3-no-root-lan-drive-samba-filesharing-server-smb1-and-smb2.3790945/>
Here's my post asking the developers the question (with screenshots).
<https://xdaforums.com/t/app-4-0-3-no-root-lan-drive-samba-filesharing-server-smb1-and-smb2.3790945/post-90056889>
"On non-rooted Android, the "Lan Drive - SMB Server" APK won't
be able to bind to ports lower than 1024. I knew that.
But the iOS "Lan Drive - SMB Server" documentation above implies
that the iOS "Lan Drive - SMB Server" IPA can bind to ports lower
than 1024 on non-jailbroken iOS devices.
Huh?
How is that possible?
Can iOS 3rd-party apps like this 'Lan Drive - SMB Server' really
bind to privileged ports (such as 445 & 139)?"
Anyone can click the URL to see if the developer responds; if the developer does respond, we can also repeat the result here for all to see.
You claim the answer is "yes" whereas I believe it's "no"; but I will
accept whatever answer the developer gives to that question above.
I'm not beholden to either answer other than it has always been my understanding that no 3rd-party app on either iOS or Android could bind to ports below 1024. If iOS allows then that's a good thing, IMHO.
In fact, it's a Uniquely Good Thing (TM) if iOS allows that.
So let's be clear... I hope to God that iOS allows that.
Because it will allow us to mount the iOS device as a drive on Windows. (without using WebDav, which is what I use on Android to mount as a drive).
Let's see what the developer reports.
the XDAIf the developer doesn't respond in a few days, I'll ping them in
Forums DM system to ask them (two guys in France) to respond to the query.
Meanwhile, I'll see what I can find out in empirical tests, but I hadn't
run them in years when I first concluded in 2019 this app was worthless.
I'll test it to see if it does what Tyrone, you, & Jolly Roger claim.
Nope. You're intentionally misinterpreting what I presented. The iOS SMB *server* is *listening* on 192.168.1.24:445 and a (windows) *client*
connects to that address and port. It all works.
On Thu, 17 Apr 2025 19:29:59 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote :
Nope. You're intentionally misinterpreting what I presented. The iOS SMB
*server* is *listening* on 192.168.1.24:445 and a (windows) *client*
connects to that address and port. It all works.
Hi Chris,
I'm sure it works, but the question is what port is it using.
Since you asked, I decided to trust you by exercising the LAN SMB Server I had installed in my old iPad in January of 2019 and the great news is I was easily able to do what you said I could do (letting it choose the port).
For now, let's not look the gift horse in the mouth (to check the ports).
Here's what I did:
1. I started the LAN SMB Server (free) on iOS which reports the following:
Server \\myipad
IP \\192.168.1.124
SMB TCP 445
NETBIOS UDP 137 138
2. In the "Users" section, it says:
Authentication type = Anonymous
3. In the "Sharings" section, it says:
LANdrive
DCIM
4. On Windows, I ran this command (as admin):
net use Z: \\192.168.1.124\LANdrive
The command completed successfully.
net use Y: \\192.1658.1.124\DCIM
The command completed successfully.
5. The mapped network drives do NOT show up in Windows File Explorer.(Note: When I map WebDAV network drives, they are mounted as a drive.)
(I'm not sure why, but they're probably not "mounted", per se.)>
6. Yet, I certainly can sit at the Windows PC and copy files from iOS.
Y:\300> copy IMG_2856.PNG C:\tmp\smbtestdir
1 file(s) copied.
7. But, by default, I get a permission denied the other way.
Y:\300> copy C:\tmp\smbtestdir\foo.txt .
Access is denied.
0 file(s) copied.
Y:\300> copy C:\tmp\smbtestdir\foo.txt Z:\.
1 file(s) copied.
8. iOSSMBLanServer:Browse > LanDrive > foo.txt = This is foo.
Here are the screenshots of that action, where the next test will be to specify the port - as this doesn't prove what port was used to do this.
<https://i.postimg.cc/rp6r6Y24/LANDRIVE-01.jpg> Daily Apple nag screen
<https://i.postimg.cc/RFd6HS61/LANDRIVE-02.jpg> Two shares by default
<https://i.postimg.cc/fykLSxhZ/LANDRIVE-03.jpg> Activate the SMB server
<https://i.postimg.cc/CKPdhvWJ/LANDRIVE-04.jpg> User is Anonymous
<https://i.postimg.cc/tRV7bNDt/LANDRIVE-05.jpg> iOS is now sharing
<https://i.postimg.cc/c4RHg1pv/LANDRIVE-06.jpg> net use X: \\iOS\share
<https://i.postimg.cc/d0xtPhyx/LANDRIVE-07.jpg> Allow iOS DCIM access
<https://i.postimg.cc/B6F3rMsj/LANDRIVE-08.jpg> Command-line access only
<https://i.postimg.cc/HsYGzpJc/LANDRIVE-09.jpg> Copy from iOS to WinPC
<https://i.postimg.cc/pdNq0Z0G/LANDRIVE-10.jpg> Copy from WinPC to iOS
This is great. What it does prove is that any user can sit at his Windows desktop to transfer files to & from iOS from that PC via the command line.
So far there is no GUI on Windows that I know of which will do it.
But certainly I just did a bidirectional copy with the command line.
I'll profusely and publicly thank you later as I still need to figure out what port it used, as this doesn't prove that it used ports below 1024.
But when I specify the port, that will tell us the answer.
In the meantime, do you know why the iOS drives don't show up as mounted?
So far so good.
a. We've proven it works.
b. We haven't (definitively) tested what port it used yet though.
That's next but I have a bunch of Vine Voice reviews to do to keep my 8IOW, I'll run away now without apologizing or admitting you were wrong.
free items a day from Amazon at any price status, so it may take a bit.
<https://amazon.com/vine/about>
On Thu, 17 Apr 2025 19:38:05 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote :
Not only can iOS bind port 445, it DOES. With evidence.
All I care about, Chris, is knowing the correct answer.
That's the reason I asked the question in the first place.
The problem is very few people here have any technical credibility.
Least of all me. I never said I'm a networking expert. Tyrone did.
I have had the free "LAN Drive - SMB Server" on my iPad since 2019.
<https://i.postimg.cc/8zk8s2mb/LANDRIVE-SMBSERVER01.jpg> Jan 24 2019
So I belatedly opened it up and read the documentation it presents.
<https://i.postimg.cc/7hgvTDRK/LANDRIVE-SMBSERVER02.jpg> LAN Drive Server
<https://i.postimg.cc/g0TbCgRH/LANDRIVE-SMBSERVER03.jpg> Allow Bonjour
<https://i.postimg.cc/SsHqMgxx/LANDRIVE-SMBSERVER04.jpg> Server Settings
<https://i.postimg.cc/MpYWF0d9/LANDRIVE-SMBSERVER05.jpg> Network Ports
<https://i.postimg.cc/wvvnFLGR/LANDRIVE-SMBSERVER06.jpg> Privileged Ports
It's still a bit confusing so to clear up the question once and for all, I took the liberty of asking the question of the developers on the XDA Forum site since the developers had linked to their XDA thread in the iOS app.
<https://xdaforums.com/t/app-4-0-3-no-root-lan-drive-samba-filesharing-server-smb1-and-smb2.3790945/>
Here's my post asking the developers the question (with screenshots).
<https://xdaforums.com/t/app-4-0-3-no-root-lan-drive-samba-filesharing-server-smb1-and-smb2.3790945/post-90056889>
"On non-rooted Android, the "Lan Drive - SMB Server" APK won't
be able to bind to ports lower than 1024. I knew that.
But the iOS "Lan Drive - SMB Server" documentation above implies
that the iOS "Lan Drive - SMB Server" IPA can bind to ports lower
than 1024 on non-jailbroken iOS devices.
Huh?
How is that possible?
Can iOS 3rd-party apps like this 'Lan Drive - SMB Server' really
bind to privileged ports (such as 445 & 139)?"
Anyone can click the URL to see if the developer responds; if the developer does respond, we can also repeat the result here for all to see.
You claim the answer is "yes" whereas I believe it's "no"; but I will
accept whatever answer the developer gives to that question above.
I'm not beholden to either answer other than it has always been my understanding that no 3rd-party app on either iOS or Android could bind to ports below 1024. If iOS allows then that's a good thing, IMHO.
In fact, it's a Uniquely Good Thing (TM) if iOS allows that.
So let's be clear... I hope to God that iOS allows that.
Because it will allow us to mount the iOS device as a drive on Windows. (without using WebDav, which is what I use on Android to mount as a drive).
Let's see what the developer reports.
If the developer doesn't respond in a few days, I'll ping them in the XDA Forums DM system to ask them (two guys in France) to respond to the query.
Meanwhile, I'll see what I can find out in empirical tests, but I hadn't
run them in years when I first concluded in 2019 this app was worthless.
I'll test it to see if it does what Tyrone, you, & Jolly Roger claim.
I'll profusely and publicly thank you later as I still need to figure out what port it used, as this doesn't prove that it used ports below 1024.
But when I specify the port, that will tell us the answer.
In the meantime, do you know why the iOS drives don't show up as mounted?
"Cx File Explorer": Similar to "File Manager +", this app also offers SMB server functionality.
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.cxinventor.file.explorer>
"FE File Explorer": This app also advertises SMB server capabilities.
<https://apps.apple.com/us/app/fe-file-explorer-pro/id499470113>
Hence the paradox:
A. Neither iOS nor Android can run a server on port 445.
B. Yet, these apps "advertise" SMB-server functionality.
Marion, 2025-04-16 08:12:
[...]
"Cx File Explorer": Similar to "File Manager +", this app also offers SMB
server functionality.
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.cxinventor.file.explorer>
It doesn't.
Cx File Explorer can use SMB shares as *client* but it can not provide a *server* for others.
net use F: \\10.0.0.149\LANDrive /tcpport:445 /USER:Test Test-905
The command completed successfully.
net use \\192.168.1.2\DCIM /tcpport:445 /USER:foo passwdWindows 10:
net use \\192.168.1.2\DCIM /USER:foo passwd
Here's a summary of what we learned in this thread on how things work.
On Thu, 17 Apr 2025 14:27:40 +0000, Tyrone wrote :
net use F: \\10.0.0.149\LANDrive /tcpport:445 /USER:Test Test-905
The command completed successfully.
Hi Tyrone,
I just saw your post and I thank you for that knowledge & agree with you.
We learned a lot from those people who contributed valuable knowledge.
And learning about the operating systems is what these ngs are all about!
For the benefit of the Windows users, apparently Win11 is smarter'n Win10
in that Windows 11 'net use' can specify the port but not Windows 10.
Windows 11:
net use \\192.168.1.2\DCIM /tcpport:445 /USER:foo passwdWindows 10:
net use \\192.168.1.2\DCIM /USER:foo passwd
Here's a summary of what we learned in this thread on how things work.
1. Anyone can sit at a Windows PC with an iOS device on the LAN to
copy files back & forth to iOS SMB shares using the Windows SMB
client; but so far, they have to do so in the Windows command line.
2. With Android, anyone can mount Android as a Windows drive letter
to use the Windows GUI to copy files bidir while sitting at the PC.
3. So the only thing we can't replicate (yet) with a person sitting
at the PC is using the Windows file system GUI to bidir with iOS.
4. For any platform, if people are willing to install LocalSend, they
cat sit at any platform an initiate bidir file xfer with that GUI.
5. Android SMB servers exist, most require root, some don't require root,
but they do the ports in ways which are nonstandard to make it work.
6. iOS SMB servers exist, but they don't require jailbreaking since they
use port 445 which is the standard way of working together with Windows.
Basically, we learned a ton which makes it easier to sit at the PC and copy files bidirectionally between any device we have connected on the LAN.
The *one* thing I haven't figured out yet is to do sit at the PC to copy files bidirectionally with iOS using the Windows file explorer GUI.
If anyone knows how to sit at the Windows PC to use the Windows file
explorer GUI to copy files bidirectionally with iOS over the LAN, please
let the rest of us know as that seems to be the only hurdle left to solve.
On Apr 18, 2025 at 9:39:06 PM EDT, "Marion" <marion@facts.com> wrote:
On Thu, 17 Apr 2025 14:27:40 +0000, Tyrone wrote :
net use F: \\10.0.0.149\LANDrive /tcpport:445 /USER:Test Test-905
The command completed successfully.
Hi Tyrone,
I just saw your post and I thank you for that knowledge & agree with you.
We learned a lot from those people who contributed valuable knowledge.
And learning about the operating systems is what these ngs are all about!
For the benefit of the Windows users, apparently Win11 is smarter'n Win10
in that Windows 11 'net use' can specify the port but not Windows 10.
Windows 11:
C:\> net use \\192.168.1.2\DCIM /tcpport:445 /USER:foo passwd
Windows 10:
C:\> net use \\192.168.1.2\DCIM /USER:foo passwd
Again, your syntax is wrong. You should be using:
net use D: \\192.168.1.2\DCIM /USER:foo passwd
Where D is whatever drive letter you want to use. That assigns the drive letter, which then appears in Windows File Explorer.
Here's a summary of what we learned in this thread on how things work.
1. Anyone can sit at a Windows PC with an iOS device on the LAN to
copy files back & forth to iOS SMB shares using the Windows SMB
client; but so far, they have to do so in the Windows command line.
The command line? I never used it. It shows as a mapped drive in Windows File Explorer. In fact, you can connect to any SMB server without using the command
line. Again, in Windows File Explorer. Or use the "net use" syntax above to assign a drive letter. With no drive letter assigned, there is nothing to mount in Windows File Explorer.
2. With Android, anyone can mount Android as a Windows drive letter
to use the Windows GUI to copy files bidir while sitting at the PC.
Same with iOS.
3. So the only thing we can't replicate (yet) with a person sitting
at the PC is using the Windows file system GUI to bidir with iOS.
Yes we can.
4. For any platform, if people are willing to install LocalSend, they
cat sit at any platform an initiate bidir file xfer with that GUI.
Dunno about that. Never used it. No need for it.
5. Android SMB servers exist, most require root, some don't require root,
but they do the ports in ways which are nonstandard to make it work.
Yes, due to the port limitations of Android.
6. iOS SMB servers exist, but they don't require jailbreaking since they
use port 445 which is the standard way of working together with Windows.
Yes.
Basically, we learned a ton which makes it easier to sit at the PC and copy >> files bidirectionally between any device we have connected on the LAN.
The *one* thing I haven't figured out yet is to do sit at the PC to copy
files bidirectionally with iOS using the Windows file explorer GUI.
There is nothing to figure out. It Just Works.
If anyone knows how to sit at the Windows PC to use the Windows file
explorer GUI to copy files bidirectionally with iOS over the LAN, please
let the rest of us know as that seems to be the only hurdle left to solve.
In all of my Windows networking experience, it has never occurred to me to use
the command line.
Again, net use D: \\192.168.1.2\DCIM /USER:foo passwd
will assign the network share as drive D.
Also, you can rename the SMB computer, so you don't even need the IP address.
I use this:
net use F: \\ipad1\LANdrive /user:Test Test-905
Ipad1 is the name I gave to my iOS SMB server. The default is localhost, which
you cannot use because "localhost" has a distinct use in Windows (and Linux and Unix I believe). You change this name on the iOS SMB Server under settings, Device Name. Then stop and restart the SMB server.
On Apr 18, 2025 at 9:39:06 PM EDT, "Marion" <marion@facts.com> wrote:
Here's a summary of what we learned in this thread on how things work.
You forgot:
7. With an iPhone/Pad you can use the Files app to connect to a Windows SMB server, to copy files back and forth between the iPad/iPhone and Windows.
just use the '/tcpport:NNNN' option and set it to the
1024 or higher port number of the Android SMB server?
That way, the Android SMB server would not be a Network *Share* that Windows could see/use, but it would be a Network *Drive* for Windows.
In addition: Cx File Explorer can offer unencrypted FTP which can run on
any port above 1024. But this is of course *not* SMB.
7. With an iPhone/Pad you can use the Files app to connect to a Windows SMB >> server, to copy files back and forth between the iPad/iPhone and Windows.
Especially since he is on record saying that's not possible, and
insulting everyone who corrected him on it.
On 19 Apr 2025 10:22:06 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote :
just use the '/tcpport:NNNN' option and set it to the
1024 or higher port number of the Android SMB server?
That way, the Android SMB server would not be a Network *Share* that Windows could see/use, but it would be a Network *Drive* for Windows.
I'm not a networking expert, but from what Tyrone told me... that's a
Windows 11-only command (to set the port at the time of using "net use").
Most of my Windows PC's are Windows 10, which does not have the '/tcpport:NNNN' option for 'net use' that Tyrone kindly had suggested.
Tyrone is aware of this limitation, so if it does work, it can only work on Windows 11 mounts, & not Windows 10 (at least not using "net use" for it).
Still, if the SMB share shows up as a drive letter in the Windows command line, why can't it show up as a drive letter in the Windows file explorer?
Marion <marion@facts.com> wrote:
On 19 Apr 2025 10:22:06 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote :
just use the '/tcpport:NNNN' option and set it to the
1024 or higher port number of the Android SMB server?
That way, the Android SMB server would not be a Network *Share* that
Windows could see/use, but it would be a Network *Drive* for Windows.
I'm not a networking expert, but from what Tyrone told me... that's a
Windows 11-only command (to set the port at the time of using "net use").
Yes, I saw that later. I checked only on my Windows 11 system. But
indeed, my wife's Windows 10 system doesn't have the '/tcpport:NNNN'
option. Well, after October 14, Windows 10 is no longer supported
anyway! (Just kidding.)
Most of my Windows PC's are Windows 10, which does not have the
'/tcpport:NNNN' option for 'net use' that Tyrone kindly had suggested.
Tyrone is aware of this limitation, so if it does work, it can only work on >> Windows 11 mounts, & not Windows 10 (at least not using "net use" for it).
Long shot: You might try to copy the net.exe executable from a Windows
11 system to a Windows 10 system (while giving it another name) and see
if the '/tcpport:NNNN' option works on Windows 10, i.e. that the Windows
10 limitation is in the net.exe, not in the underlying OS.
N.B. net.exe is in %windir%\system32.
Still, if the SMB share shows up as a drive letter in the Windows command
line, why can't it show up as a drive letter in the Windows file explorer?
No idea. It should show in both. Try to get a full path to some folder
on the network drive and paste that path into the path field of File Explorer, i.e. something like Z:\topfolder\subfolder. Even if File
Explorer does not *show* Z: for some strange reason, it should be able
to *use* it (if it can be used in a Command Prompt window).
He's either lying or utterly incompetent...
..because it DOES show in File Explorer.
On Apr 22, 2025 at 3:47:49 PM EDT, "Alan" <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
He's either lying or utterly incompetent...
My money is on "lying AND utterly incompetent".
..because it DOES show in File Explorer.
Of course it does. It always has. For over 30 years.
I think he simply can not accept that iOS can do something that Android can't do. So he is saying that connecting to Android creates a drive letter but connecting to iOS does not.
Which is the lying part.
As if the Server you are connecting to has any bearing on how the Client displays the share.
Which is the utterly incompetent part.
On 2025-04-22 11:01, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Marion <marion@facts.com> wrote:
On 19 Apr 2025 10:22:06 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote :
just use the '/tcpport:NNNN' option and set it to the
1024 or higher port number of the Android SMB server?
Still, if the SMB share shows up as a drive letter in the Windows command >> line, why can't it show up as a drive letter in the Windows file explorer?
No idea. It should show in both. Try to get a full path to some folder on the network drive and paste that path into the path field of File Explorer, i.e. something like Z:\topfolder\subfolder. Even if File Explorer does not *show* Z: for some strange reason, it should be able
to *use* it (if it can be used in a Command Prompt window).
He's either lying or utterly incompetent...
..because it DOES show in File Explorer.
On Apr 22, 2025 at 3:47:49?PM EDT, "Alan" <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
He's either lying or utterly incompetent...
My money is on "lying AND utterly incompetent".
..because it DOES show in File Explorer.
Of course it does. It always has. For over 30 years.
I think he simply can not accept that iOS can do something that Android can't do. So he is saying that connecting to Android creates a drive letter but connecting to iOS does not.
Which is the lying part.
As if the Server you are connecting to has any bearing on how the Client displays the share.
Which is the utterly incompetent part.
I ask in the hope that maybe someone else here is who can explain how to mount mobile device (iOS or Android) SMB (or FTP) shares as a Windows drive (such that the drive shows up not only in the Windows command line, but
also in the Windows file explorer GUI like it does with WebDav shares).
Marion, 2025-04-22 04:08:
[...]
I ask in the hope that maybe someone else here is who can explain how to mount mobile device (iOS or Android) SMB (or FTP) shares as a Windows drive (such that the drive shows up not only in the Windows command line, but also in the Windows file explorer GUI like it does with WebDav shares).
Why do you insist of having a SMB or FTP share?
Why just using an USB cable and MTP which is supported by Android and
Windows alike.
Marion, 2025-04-22 04:08:
[...]
I ask in the hope that maybe someone else here is who can explain how to
mount mobile device (iOS or Android) SMB (or FTP) shares as a Windows drive >> (such that the drive shows up not only in the Windows command line, but
also in the Windows file explorer GUI like it does with WebDav shares).
Why do you insist of having a SMB or FTP share?
Why just using an USB cable and MTP which is supported by Android and
Windows alike.
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
Marion, 2025-04-22 04:08:
[...]
I ask in the hope that maybe someone else here is who can explain how to >>> mount mobile device (iOS or Android) SMB (or FTP) shares as a Windows drive >>> (such that the drive shows up not only in the Windows command line, but
also in the Windows file explorer GUI like it does with WebDav shares).
Why do you insist of having a SMB or FTP share?
Why just using an USB cable and MTP which is supported by Android and
Windows alike.
Never mind that 'Arlen''s drive-letter 'problem' is only his and
nobody else's, BUT:
It's reasonable to want 1) not having to have to plug in a USB cable,
2) a similar setup for both iOS<-->Windows and Android<-->Windows and 3)
to control the transfer from the Windows side.
For those 3 wants, a SMB server on the iOS/Android device is the best solution,
On 24.04.2025 19:04, Arno Welzel wrote:
Marion, 2025-04-22 04:08:
And for Android there is a great open source ftpd server:
https://github.com/wolpi/prim-ftpd
Just start the server on the Android device, enter the displayed
IP address in Windows explorer (or scan the displayed QR code) and
you can copy files from or to the Android device like it is a local
folder.
But you should not install the App from Google Playstore because
Goolge doesn't allow Apps with full access to the file system
(so the Google Playstore version has only restricted access to
the file system).
Use instead:
https://f-droid.org/packages/org.primftpd/
Frank Slootweg wrote on 4/24/2025 12:35 PM:
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
Marion, 2025-04-22 04:08:
[...]
I ask in the hope that maybe someone else here is who can explain
how to mount mobile device (iOS or Android) SMB (or FTP) shares as
a Windows drive (such that the drive shows up not only in the
Windows command line, but also in the Windows file explorer GUI
like it does with WebDav shares).
Why do you insist of having a SMB or FTP share?
Why just using an USB cable and MTP which is supported by Android
and Windows alike.
Never mind that 'Arlen''s drive-letter 'problem' is only his and
nobody else's, BUT:
It's reasonable to want 1) not having to have to plug in a USB
cable, 2) a similar setup for both iOS<-->Windows and
Android<-->Windows and 3) to control the transfer from the Windows
side.
For those 3 wants, a SMB server on the iOS/Android device is the
best solution,
YES. And it works very well with your local network's WIFI. No need
to fiddle with cables and go sit at your computer.
But it doesn't work with apple's native "Files" app, at least on some versions of IOS. It flags things like network drives as read only.
It's been broken for a long time, so very unlikely apple will ever fix
it. Most iphone users don't even use or know about such things
anyway, right?
But the good news is that some aftermarket apps WILL function properly.
Frank Slootweg wrote on 4/24/2025 12:35 PM:
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
Marion, 2025-04-22 04:08:
[...]
I ask in the hope that maybe someone else here is who can
explain how to mount mobile device (iOS or Android) SMB (or
FTP) shares as a Windows drive (such that the drive shows up
not only in the Windows command line, but also in the Windows
file explorer GUI like it does with WebDav shares).
Why do you insist of having a SMB or FTP share?
Why just using an USB cable and MTP which is supported by
Android and Windows alike.
Never mind that 'Arlen''s drive-letter 'problem' is only his and
nobody else's, BUT:
It's reasonable to want 1) not having to have to plug in a USB
cable, 2) a similar setup for both iOS<-->Windows and Android<--
Windows and 3) to control the transfer from the Windows side.
For those 3 wants, a SMB server on the iOS/Android device is the
best solution,
YES. And it works very well with your local network's WIFI. No need
to fiddle with cables and go sit at your computer.
But it doesn't work with apple's native "Files" app, at least on
some versions of IOS. It flags things like network drives as read
only. It's been broken for a long time, so very unlikely apple will
ever fix it. Most iphone users don't even use or know about such
things anyway, right?
On 2025-04-24 21:31, Herbert Kleebauer wrote:
https://f-droid.org/packages/org.primftpd/
I'm testing it. In ftp mode, the app starts, then the system says it
died. If I try in the interval to connect from linux, it says connection refused. [...] I find that there is a timeout of 30". Even disabling it,
the application dies.
cer@Telcontar:~/tmp> ftp -P 12345 cer:...@192.168.2.18
ftp: Can't connect to `192.168.2.18:12345': Connection refused
ftp: Can't connect to `192.168.2.18:12345'
ftp: Can't connect or login to host `192.168.2.18:?' cer@Telcontar:~/Varia/Gadgetos/MovilMotorolaG52/tmp>
(with the computer firewall down)
The sftp server doesn't even start in the app. It says "stopped" all the time.
And for Android there is a great open source ftpd server:
https://github.com/wolpi/prim-ftpd
Just start the server on the Android device, enter the displayed
IP address in Windows explorer (or scan the displayed QR code) and
you can copy files from or to the Android device like it is a local
folder.
But you should not install the App from Google Playstore because
Goolge doesn't allow Apps with full access to the file system
(so the Google Playstore version has only restricted access to
the file system).
Use instead:
https://f-droid.org/packages/org.primftpd/
On 2025-04-24 12:59, Hank Rogers wrote:
Frank Slootweg wrote on 4/24/2025 12:35 PM:
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
Marion, 2025-04-22 04:08:
[...]
I ask in the hope that maybe someone else here is who can
explain how to mount mobile device (iOS or Android) SMB (or
FTP) shares as a Windows drive (such that the drive shows up
not only in the Windows command line, but also in the Windows
file explorer GUI like it does with WebDav shares).
Why do you insist of having a SMB or FTP share?
Why just using an USB cable and MTP which is supported by
Android and Windows alike.
Never mind that 'Arlen''s drive-letter 'problem' is only his and
nobody else's, BUT:
It's reasonable to want 1) not having to have to plug in a USB
cable, 2) a similar setup for both iOS<-->Windows and Android<--
Windows and 3) to control the transfer from the Windows side.
For those 3 wants, a SMB server on the iOS/Android device is the
best solution,
YES. And it works very well with your local network's WIFI. No need
to fiddle with cables and go sit at your computer.
But it doesn't work with apple's native "Files" app, at least on
some versions of IOS. It flags things like network drives as read
only. It's been broken for a long time, so very unlikely apple will
ever fix it. Most iphone users don't even use or know about such
things anyway, right?
Which versions?
What are your sources for this?
On 2025-04-24, Hank Rogers <Hank@nospam.invalid> wrote:
Frank Slootweg wrote on 4/24/2025 12:35 PM:
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
Marion, 2025-04-22 04:08:
[...]
I ask in the hope that maybe someone else here is who can explain
how to mount mobile device (iOS or Android) SMB (or FTP) shares as
a Windows drive (such that the drive shows up not only in the
Windows command line, but also in the Windows file explorer GUI
like it does with WebDav shares).
Why do you insist of having a SMB or FTP share?
Why just using an USB cable and MTP which is supported by Android
and Windows alike.
Never mind that 'Arlen''s drive-letter 'problem' is only his and
nobody else's, BUT:
It's reasonable to want 1) not having to have to plug in a USB
cable, 2) a similar setup for both iOS<-->Windows and
Android<-->Windows and 3) to control the transfer from the Windows
side.
For those 3 wants, a SMB server on the iOS/Android device is the
best solution,
YES. And it works very well with your local network's WIFI. No need
to fiddle with cables and go sit at your computer.
But it doesn't work with apple's native "Files" app, at least on some
versions of IOS. It flags things like network drives as read only.
It's been broken for a long time, so very unlikely apple will ever fix
it. Most iphone users don't even use or know about such things
anyway, right?
Those of us who have been using the Files app to connect to SMB servers without issue for years beg to differ. I guess you want us not to
believe our lying eyes. 😉
And speaking of not knowing things, a whole lot of people don't know how
to properly configure Windows sharing (including Arlen who originated
this thread), so those web hits you found saying the Files app SMB connections are supposedly read-only probably contain a *lot* of
user error.
But the good news is that some aftermarket apps WILL function properly.
Better news is the Files app works fine. 🙂
When can I expect an apology for that?
Alan wrote on 4/24/2025 4:29 PM:
On 2025-04-24 12:59, Hank Rogers wrote:
Frank Slootweg wrote on 4/24/2025 12:35 PM:
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
Marion, 2025-04-22 04:08:
[...]
I ask in the hope that maybe someone else here is who can
explain how to mount mobile device (iOS or Android) SMB (or
FTP) shares as a Windows drive (such that the drive shows up
not only in the Windows command line, but also in the Windows
file explorer GUI like it does with WebDav shares).
Why do you insist of having a SMB or FTP share?
Why just using an USB cable and MTP which is supported by
Android and Windows alike.
Never mind that 'Arlen''s drive-letter 'problem' is only his and
nobody else's, BUT:
It's reasonable to want 1) not having to have to plug in a USB
cable, 2) a similar setup for both iOS<-->Windows and Android<--
Windows and 3) to control the transfer from the Windows side.
For those 3 wants, a SMB server on the iOS/Android device is the
best solution,
YES. And it works very well with your local network's WIFI. No need
to fiddle with cables and go sit at your computer.
But it doesn't work with apple's native "Files" app, at least on
some versions of IOS. It flags things like network drives as read
only. It's been broken for a long time, so very unlikely apple will
ever fix it. Most iphone users don't even use or know about such
things anyway, right?
Which versions?
What are your sources for this?
Ever hear of this new thing called google search? It's amazing once you
get the hang of it.
On 24.04.2025 23:39, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2025-04-24 21:31, Herbert Kleebauer wrote:
https://f-droid.org/packages/org.primftpd/
I'm testing it. In ftp mode, the app starts, then the system says it
died. If I try in the interval to connect from linux, it says connection
refused. [...] I find that there is a timeout of 30". Even disabling it,
the application dies.
cer@Telcontar:~/tmp> ftp -P 12345Â cer:...@192.168.2.18
ftp: Can't connect to `192.168.2.18:12345': Connection refused
ftp: Can't connect to `192.168.2.18:12345'
ftp: Can't connect or login to host `192.168.2.18:?'
cer@Telcontar:~/Varia/Gadgetos/MovilMotorolaG52/tmp>
(with the computer firewall down)
The sftp server doesn't even start in the app. It says "stopped" all the
time.
I use it on 3 devices (Android 4.4, 8.0 and 14) without any
problems. You have to specify in the settings which server
to start (ftp, sftp or both)
and whether the server should be
started when the App is started or if you want to start the
server manually.
I have anonymous ftp enabled, so I don't have
to use username/password.
On 2025-04-24 15:09, Hank Rogers wrote:
Alan wrote on 4/24/2025 4:29 PM:
On 2025-04-24 12:59, Hank Rogers wrote:
Frank Slootweg wrote on 4/24/2025 12:35 PM:
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
Marion, 2025-04-22 04:08:
[...]
I ask in the hope that maybe someone else here is who can
explain how to mount mobile device (iOS or Android) SMB (or
FTP) shares as a Windows drive (such that the drive shows up
not only in the Windows command line, but also in the Windows
file explorer GUI like it does with WebDav shares).
Why do you insist of having a SMB or FTP share?
Why just using an USB cable and MTP which is supported by
Android and Windows alike.
Never mind that 'Arlen''s drive-letter 'problem' is only his and
nobody else's, BUT:
It's reasonable to want 1) not having to have to plug in a USB
cable, 2) a similar setup for both iOS<-->Windows and Android<--
Windows and 3) to control the transfer from the Windows side.
For those 3 wants, a SMB server on the iOS/Android device is the
best solution,
YES. And it works very well with your local network's WIFI. No need
to fiddle with cables and go sit at your computer.
But it doesn't work with apple's native "Files" app, at least on
some versions of IOS. It flags things like network drives as read
only. It's been broken for a long time, so very unlikely apple will
ever fix it. Most iphone users don't even use or know about such
things anyway, right?
Which versions?
What are your sources for this?
Ever hear of this new thing called google search? It's amazing once
you get the hang of it.
So it's that easy...
...that you didn't do it.
Why just using an USB cable and MTP which is supported by Android and
Windows alike.
Because it is easier to do it wireless.
But there is no software
or configuration necessary on the Windows side because Windows
explorer has an built-in ftp client. Just enter into the address
bar of the explorer:
ftp://username:password@ftpserver_url (or IP address)
Or create a link or batch with:
C:\Windows\explorer.exe ftp://username:password@ftpserver_url(or IP address) And for Android there is a great open source ftpd server: https://github.com/wolpi/prim-ftpd
Just start the server on the Android device, enter the displayed
IP address in Windows explorer (or scan the displayed QR code) and
you can copy files from or to the Android device like it is a local
folder.
But you should not install the App from Google Playstore because
Goolge doesn't allow Apps with full access to the file system
(so the Google Playstore version has only restricted access to
the file system).
Use instead:
https://f-droid.org/packages/org.primftpd/
On Fri, 18 Apr 2025 01:16:49 +0000, Tyrone wrote :
When can I expect an apology for that?
I've been on Usenet since as long as anyone here, where what I care about
are the facts, and then reasonably logical sensible assessment of fact.
If I state a fact that is wrong, then, when I am shown a correction, I will immediately, gladly, publicly openly & humbly apologize for stating that incorrect fact - and - the proof is I've done that a few times on this ng.
But let's be adults please... just seeing Apple trolls like Jolly Roger or Alan Baker "claiming" every fact is wrong, doesn't prove it's wrong.
Same with you, Tyrone. Or Chris. You've been dead wrong multiple times, (Chris more than you though given you "appear" to be new here), so I don't believe a word you or Chris state - without personally verifying it first.
Because all of you have repeatedly brazenly lied, and none of you have ever apologized for doing so, means nothing any of you say has much meaning.
At least I apologize when my stated facts are wrong, and I apologize when
my assessments based on those stated facts need to be adjusted due to the knowledge of the facts changing.
An example is I couldn't find anything reliable on the net proving that Android or iOS apps could bind to privileged ports, yet iOS apps can.
I apologized for stating that incorrectly and for forming an incorrect assessment as a result - but I've multiple times corrected & apologized.
In summary, that apology/correction is where I differ from most people.
a. My factual statements are (nearly) 100% correct as a result;
b. Hence, my assessments are (nearly) 100% sensibly logical as a result;
c. Yours... are not.
I don't apologize for stating that you or Chris or Jolly Roger can't be trusted, because you can't. You were right this time though. 100% rigfht.
And I was 100% wrong.
For that, I apologize.
But I do not apologize for not trusting you.
It's not just you. I don't trust any Apple troll.
Which is simply being perfectly logically sensible, after all.
I can be trusted; you can't.
In decades on Usenet, I've never been wrong, or, if I was, and if it was corrected, I have sought out th truth and then corrected it such that the
end result is that I've never been wrong in my facts during the decades.
And that's a damn good honest and trustworthy logically sensible record.
Alan wrote on 4/24/2025 5:53 PM:
On 2025-04-24 15:09, Hank Rogers wrote:
Alan wrote on 4/24/2025 4:29 PM:
On 2025-04-24 12:59, Hank Rogers wrote:
Frank Slootweg wrote on 4/24/2025 12:35 PM:
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
Marion, 2025-04-22 04:08:
[...]
I ask in the hope that maybe someone else here is who can
explain how to mount mobile device (iOS or Android) SMB (or
FTP) shares as a Windows drive (such that the drive shows up
not only in the Windows command line, but also in the Windows
file explorer GUI like it does with WebDav shares).
Why do you insist of having a SMB or FTP share?
Why just using an USB cable and MTP which is supported by
Android and Windows alike.
Never mind that 'Arlen''s drive-letter 'problem' is only his and
nobody else's, BUT:
It's reasonable to want 1) not having to have to plug in a USB
cable, 2) a similar setup for both iOS<-->Windows and Android<--
Windows and 3) to control the transfer from the Windows side.
For those 3 wants, a SMB server on the iOS/Android device is the
best solution,
YES. And it works very well with your local network's WIFI. No need >>>>> to fiddle with cables and go sit at your computer.
But it doesn't work with apple's native "Files" app, at least on >>>>> some versions of IOS. It flags things like network drives as read
only. It's been broken for a long time, so very unlikely apple will >>>>> ever fix it. Most iphone users don't even use or know about such
things anyway, right?
Which versions?
What are your sources for this?
Ever hear of this new thing called google search? It's amazing once
you get the hang of it.
So it's that easy...
...that you didn't do it.
I'm not going to spoon feed you. Get off your ass and do a search, or
fuck off.
Alan wrote on 4/24/2025 4:29 PM:
On 2025-04-24 12:59, Hank Rogers wrote:
Frank Slootweg wrote on 4/24/2025 12:35 PM:
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
Marion, 2025-04-22 04:08:
[...]
I ask in the hope that maybe someone else here is who can
explain how to mount mobile device (iOS or Android) SMB (or
FTP) shares as a Windows drive (such that the drive shows up
not only in the Windows command line, but also in the Windows
file explorer GUI like it does with WebDav shares).
Why do you insist of having a SMB or FTP share?
Why just using an USB cable and MTP which is supported by
Android and Windows alike.
Never mind that 'Arlen''s drive-letter 'problem' is only his and
nobody else's, BUT:
It's reasonable to want 1) not having to have to plug in a USB
cable, 2) a similar setup for both iOS<-->Windows and Android<--
Windows and 3) to control the transfer from the Windows side.
For those 3 wants, a SMB server on the iOS/Android device is the
best solution,
YES. And it works very well with your local network's WIFI. No need
to fiddle with cables and go sit at your computer.
But it doesn't work with apple's native "Files" app, at least on
some versions of IOS. It flags things like network drives as read
only. It's been broken for a long time, so very unlikely apple will
ever fix it. Most iphone users don't even use or know about such
things anyway, right?
Which versions?
What are your sources for this?
Ever hear of this new thing called google search? It's amazing once you
get the hang of it.
On 2025-04-24, Hank Rogers <Hank@nospam.invalid> wrote:
Alan wrote on 4/24/2025 4:29 PM:
On 2025-04-24 12:59, Hank Rogers wrote:
Frank Slootweg wrote on 4/24/2025 12:35 PM:
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
Marion, 2025-04-22 04:08:
[...]
I ask in the hope that maybe someone else here is who can
explain how to mount mobile device (iOS or Android) SMB (or
FTP) shares as a Windows drive (such that the drive shows up
not only in the Windows command line, but also in the Windows
file explorer GUI like it does with WebDav shares).
Why do you insist of having a SMB or FTP share?
Why just using an USB cable and MTP which is supported by
Android and Windows alike.
Never mind that 'Arlen''s drive-letter 'problem' is only his and
nobody else's, BUT:
It's reasonable to want 1) not having to have to plug in a USB
cable, 2) a similar setup for both iOS<-->Windows and Android<--
Windows and 3) to control the transfer from the Windows side.
For those 3 wants, a SMB server on the iOS/Android device is the
best solution,
YES. And it works very well with your local network's WIFI. No need
to fiddle with cables and go sit at your computer.
But it doesn't work with apple's native "Files" app, at least on
some versions of IOS. It flags things like network drives as read
only. It's been broken for a long time, so very unlikely apple will
ever fix it. Most iphone users don't even use or know about such
things anyway, right?
Which versions?
What are your sources for this?
Ever hear of this new thing called google search? It's amazing once you
get the hang of it.
Yes, a Google search that doesn't show what you claim it does. For all
you know a significant number of those people claiming the Files app SMB connectivity is supposedly "read-only" just didn't configure Windows
file sharing or permissions correctly.
Same with you, Tyrone. Or Chris. You've been dead wrong multiple times,
(Chris more than you though given you "appear" to be new here), so I don't >> believe a word you or Chris state - without personally verifying it first.
I've shown you to be wrong multiple times and you rarely admit it. Unlike you, I don't state publicly that I'm never wrong. I never lie, however,
also unlike you.
An example is I couldn't find anything reliable on the net proving that
Android or iOS apps could bind to privileged ports, yet iOS apps can.
Googling proves nothing. Yet you prefer it over direct evidence because you value your own bias over what you could do for yourself.
In summary, that apology/correction is where I differ from most people.
a. My factual statements are (nearly) 100% correct as a result;
b. Hence, my assessments are (nearly) 100% sensibly logical as a result;
c. Yours... are not.
Utter crap.
I can be trusted; you can't.
Utter crap. You don't know what facts are. You are only interested in bias.
In decades on Usenet, I've never been wrong, or, if I was, and if it was
corrected, I have sought out th truth and then corrected it such that the
end result is that I've never been wrong in my facts during the decades.
That's the most ridiculous thing I've read in a long time.
On 2025-04-25 00:01, Herbert Kleebauer wrote:
https://f-droid.org/packages/org.primftpd/
I guess the app is not compatible with my phone.
But with Android, the USB cable is sooooooo very convenient for
bidirectional copies
As Frank noted, there are conveniences to both approaches, where what's likely more important than anything else is having the same method for
both.
a. You want to sit at the PC
b. You want to access both iOS & Android
c. And you want the same things to be done the same ways
That's really what this thread is all about.
I've tested *every* free ftp-related tool ever suggested on this ng.
Primitive FTPd:
<https://f-droid.org/en/packages/com.servestream.primitiveftpd/>
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details%3Fid%3Dcom.servestream.primitiveftpd>
On 25.04.2025 02:09, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2025-04-25 00:01, Herbert Kleebauer wrote:
https://f-droid.org/packages/org.primftpd/
I guess the app is not compatible with my phone.
Maybe the problem is the Linux computer. Can you access
ftp.gnu.org ?
Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:Show it.
On 2025-04-24, Hank Rogers <Hank@nospam.invalid> wrote:
Alan wrote on 4/24/2025 4:29 PM:
On 2025-04-24 12:59, Hank Rogers wrote:
Frank Slootweg wrote on 4/24/2025 12:35 PM:
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
Marion, 2025-04-22 04:08:
[...]
I ask in the hope that maybe someone else here is who can
explain how to mount mobile device (iOS or Android) SMB (or
FTP) shares as a Windows drive (such that the drive shows up
not only in the Windows command line, but also in the Windows
file explorer GUI like it does with WebDav shares).
Why do you insist of having a SMB or FTP share?
Why just using an USB cable and MTP which is supported by
Android and Windows alike.
Never mind that 'Arlen''s drive-letter 'problem' is only his and
nobody else's, BUT:
It's reasonable to want 1) not having to have to plug in a USB
cable, 2) a similar setup for both iOS<-->Windows and Android<--
Windows and 3) to control the transfer from the Windows side.
For those 3 wants, a SMB server on the iOS/Android device is the
best solution,
YES. And it works very well with your local network's WIFI. No need >>>>> to fiddle with cables and go sit at your computer.
But it doesn't work with apple's native "Files" app, at least on
some versions of IOS. It flags things like network drives as read
only. It's been broken for a long time, so very unlikely apple will >>>>> ever fix it. Most iphone users don't even use or know about such
things anyway, right?
Which versions?
What are your sources for this?
Ever hear of this new thing called google search? It's amazing once you >>> get the hang of it.
Yes, a Google search that doesn't show what you claim it does. For all
you know a significant number of those people claiming the Files app SMB
connectivity is supposedly "read-only" just didn't configure Windows
file sharing or permissions correctly.
And for all you know, they saw the same things I did.
READ ONLY
On 25.04.2025 02:21, Marion wrote:
But with Android, the USB cable is sooooooo very convenient for
bidirectional copies
Why is it easier to connect a cable instead of just starting the
ftp server. You can even let the ftp server automatically start
at boot time, so nothing is to do on the phone side at all. And on
the Windows side, you click on an icon on the desktop which starts
Windows explorer and displays the virtual ftp drive (the IP address
of the ftp server normally doesn't change).
But the real problem is the USB socket, especially if it is also used
for charging. The life cycle of an USB socket is limited and a defective
USB socket normally converts a phone/tablet into trash. I have here
two tablets with a defective micro-USB socket, replacing the socket
isn't easy and not worth the effort, so I removed the battery and
soldered two wires which I connected to a 4.2 V power supply. Now
the tablet isn't "mobile" as before, but it can be always on, without worrying about an empty battery or killing the battery by continuously charging. And this way even an old Android 4 tablet can be used as
an internet radio (together with external speakers).
As Frank noted, there are conveniences to both approaches, where what's
likely more important than anything else is having the same method for
both.
a. You want to sit at the PC
b. You want to access both iOS & Android
c. And you want the same things to be done the same ways
That's really what this thread is all about.
And there is no ftp server for iPhones?
I've tested *every* free ftp-related tool ever suggested on this ng.
You don't need any ftp tool on the Windows side. The explorer has
a built-in ftp client. And if you use Windows explorer to copy
files on your local disks, why should you use something else for an "ftp-disk" (it looks exactly the same way).
You haven't learned the rule yet, Herbert:Primitive FTPd:
 <https://f-droid.org/en/packages/com.servestream.primitiveftpd/>
 <https://play.google.com/store/apps/
details%3Fid%3Dcom.servestream.primitiveftpd>
And whats wrong with it?
For those 3 wants, a SMB server on the iOS/Android device is the best solution, because (AFAIK) iOS has no MTP support and PTP support is less complete (can see less of the file system) than on Android.
UPDATE!
To summarize what we've learned, it turns out that while Android (non root) can not bind an SMB server to privileged ports, iOS appears to be able to.
Frank Slootweg, 2025-04-24 19:35:
[...]
For those 3 wants, a SMB server on the iOS/Android device is the best solution, because (AFAIK) iOS has no MTP support and PTP support is less complete (can see less of the file system) than on Android.
With iOS this is indeed different as I learned.
But Android definitely does NOT allow to port 445 for apps as *server* without root access and Windows is not able to connect to SMB shares on
non standard ports.
Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
On 2025-04-24, Hank Rogers <Hank@nospam.invalid> wrote:
Alan wrote on 4/24/2025 4:29 PM:
On 2025-04-24 12:59, Hank Rogers wrote:
Frank Slootweg wrote on 4/24/2025 12:35 PM:
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
Marion, 2025-04-22 04:08:
[...]
I ask in the hope that maybe someone else here is who can
explain how to mount mobile device (iOS or Android) SMB (or
FTP) shares as a Windows drive (such that the drive shows up
not only in the Windows command line, but also in the Windows
file explorer GUI like it does with WebDav shares).
Why do you insist of having a SMB or FTP share?
Why just using an USB cable and MTP which is supported by
Android and Windows alike.
Never mind that 'Arlen''s drive-letter 'problem' is only his and
nobody else's, BUT:
It's reasonable to want 1) not having to have to plug in a USB
cable, 2) a similar setup for both iOS<-->Windows and Android<--
Windows and 3) to control the transfer from the Windows side.
For those 3 wants, a SMB server on the iOS/Android device is the
best solution,
YES. And it works very well with your local network's WIFI. No need >>>>> to fiddle with cables and go sit at your computer.
But it doesn't work with apple's native "Files" app, at least on
some versions of IOS. It flags things like network drives as read
only. It's been broken for a long time, so very unlikely apple will >>>>> ever fix it. Most iphone users don't even use or know about such
things anyway, right?
Which versions?
What are your sources for this?
Ever hear of this new thing called google search? It's amazing once you >>> get the hang of it.
Yes, a Google search that doesn't show what you claim it does. For all
you know a significant number of those people claiming the Files app SMB
connectivity is supposedly "read-only" just didn't configure Windows
file sharing or permissions correctly.
And for all you know, they saw the same things I did.
READ ONLY
BTW, has your check from cupertino arrived yet?
For those 3 wants, a SMB server on the iOS/Android device is the best
solution, because (AFAIK) iOS has no MTP support and PTP support is less
complete (can see less of the file system) than on Android.
With iOS this is indeed different as I learned.
But Android definitely does NOT allow to port 445 for apps as *server* without root access and Windows is not able to connect to SMB shares on
non standard ports.
Yes, you only apologised because I made your argument stronger. Problem is you lacked the ability to properly interpret the results in the wider context.
If you can recall any other time I was wrong on the facts, please state
them here,
You were utterly wrong in claiming that iOS - quelle surprise! - had no geofencing ability. You deemed the only option as a crappy unsupported app with a handful low star reviews. I highlighted to you a very simple
Shortcut that met your supposed needs of an "elder" person iirc. No extra software required and far more functional than your "solution". No thanks
or any response received.
99% of what you call "fact" is actually opinion or perhaps an
extrapolation.
Just remember that I teach you Apple trolls hundreds of facts about Apple
per year that you don't like (such as the zero-day exploits always being
higher for iOS than for Android as compiled continually by CISA).
You not liking a bona fide fact does not mean that fact is wrong.
<https://www.cisa.gov/known-exploited-vulnerabilities-catalog>
See? This link doesn't substantiate your claim. It's simply a data source.
A fact is Apple's promised iOS support is shorter than that of Samsung's.
An assessment is Apple's iOS support sucks compared to that of Samsung's.
This is a perfect example of your bias. You value a written statement more than actual evidence.
Yes, Samsung ( and google) has promised 7 years of support for new phones from the end of last year sometime.
And yes, Apple has recently stated publicly that they will support iphones for at least 5 years.
On the face of it 5 < 7.
Apple, however, has a very well evidenced history of fully supporting
iphones for 5-8 years. For example, the Xs, Xs Max and Xr models launched
in 2018 are still fully supported and will be until at least September. https://endoflife.date/iphone
Samsung (and google) has historically only supported phones for as little
as three years:
https://endoflife.date/samsung-mobile
https://endoflife.date/pixel
So Samsung needed to up their game and won't catch up with Apple with real world evidence for a few years yet.
But Android definitely does NOT allow to port 445 for apps as *server*
without root access and Windows is not able to connect to SMB shares on
non standard ports.
I am well aware of that and actually *I* brought up that limitation,
so, as I - and others - mentioned, please follow the thread before commenting.
That said, Windows 11 (not 10) can probably use an Android SMB server
as a Network *Drive* (not Network Share) on a port greater than 1023 by
using the '/tcpport:' option of 'net use', but the jury is still out on
that one.
On 25 Apr 2025 15:50:59 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote :[...]
I concur that Frank is the first person, to my knowledge, many years ago in fact, who taught most of us (including me) that Android SMB server apps (of which there used to be many) cannot bind to privileged ports (i.e., <1024).[...]
I only learned during the testing done in this thread, that iOS apps can.
That said, Windows 11 (not 10) can probably use an Android SMB server
as a Network *Drive* (not Network Share) on a port greater than 1023 by using the '/tcpport:' option of 'net use', but the jury is still out on that one.
If someone is industrious on Android, they might want to test the claims
made in this thread, however the developer doesn't seem to be actively involved in the thread (which was originally authored in 2018).
*[APP][4.0.3+][NO Root] LAN drive Samba Filesharing Server SMB1/SMB2*
<https://xdaforums.com/t/app-4-0-3-no-root-lan-drive-samba-filesharing-server-smb1-and-smb2.3790945/page-12#post-90056889>
But with Android, the USB cable is sooooooo very convenient for
bidirectional copies
Why is it easier to connect a cable instead of just starting the
ftp server. You can even let the ftp server automatically start
at boot time, so nothing is to do on the phone side at all. And on
the Windows side, you click on an icon on the desktop which starts
Windows explorer and displays the virtual ftp drive (the IP address
of the ftp server normally doesn't change).
net use Z: \\102.168.1.2@8000\DavWWWRoot /USER:joe * /PERSISTENT:YES
But the real problem is the USB socket, especially if it is also used
for charging. The life cycle of an USB socket is limited and a defective
USB socket normally converts a phone/tablet into trash.
I have here
two tablets with a defective micro-USB socket, replacing the socket
isn't easy and not worth the effort, so I removed the battery and
soldered two wires which I connected to a 4.2 V power supply. Now
the tablet isn't "mobile" as before, but it can be always on, without worrying about an empty battery or killing the battery by continuously charging. And this way even an old Android 4 tablet can be used as
an internet radio (together with external speakers).
As Frank noted, there are conveniences to both approaches, where what's
likely more important than anything else is having the same method for
both.
a. You want to sit at the PC
b. You want to access both iOS & Android
c. And you want the same things to be done the same ways
That's really what this thread is all about.
And there is no ftp server for iPhones?
I've tested *every* free ftp-related tool ever suggested on this ng.
You don't need any ftp tool on the Windows side. The explorer has
a built-in ftp client. And if you use Windows explorer to copy
files on your local disks, why should you use something else for an "ftp-disk" (it looks exactly the same way).
Primitive FTPd:
<https://f-droid.org/en/packages/com.servestream.primitiveftpd/>
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details%3Fid%3Dcom.servestream.primitiveftpd>
And whats wrong with it?
On Fri, 25 Apr 2025 17:17:01 +0200, Arno Welzel wrote :
For those 3 wants, a SMB server on the iOS/Android device is the best
solution, because (AFAIK) iOS has no MTP support and PTP support is less >>> complete (can see less of the file system) than on Android.
With iOS this is indeed different as I learned.
But Android definitely does NOT allow to port 445 for apps as *server*
without root access and Windows is not able to connect to SMB shares on
non standard ports.
Hi Arno,
You've come to the same realization that I did, where initially I had
assumed that any SMB server on a mobile device used nonstandard ports.
What we've learned from this thread, and which is rather valuable
knowledge, is that while Android SMB servers must use non-standard ports
due to the nix-like restriction on privileged ports, it turns out that iOS servers actually, surprisingly, thankfully in fact, use privileged ports.
Who knew?
Since Apple trolls depend on people not testing their answers
To summarize what we've learned, it turns out that while Android (non root) >> can not bind an SMB server to privileged ports, iOS appears to be able to.
But what you can do with Android:
1) Create a Windows share on the host PC
2) Use Cx File Explorer (<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.cxinventor.file.explorer>)
to connect to that share FROM Android TO the PC
3) Copy the files as you like.
Or if you want to backup/copy files from/to Android on a regular basis
for backup etc.:
1) Create a Windows share on the host PC
2) Use FolderSync (<https://play.google.com/store/search?q=FolderSync>)
and create a "folder pair" where one folder is the share on the PC
3) Create a sync/copy job to transfer complete folder contents from or
to Android or sync them.
net use Z: \\102.168.1.2@8000\DavWWWRoot /USER:joe * /PERSISTENT:YES<https://i.postimg.cc/QtbR1GY0/webdav13.jpg>
Since Apple trolls depend on people not testing their answers
...says the idiot who refused to believe iOS can indeed (a) run an SMB server, and (b) do so over the standard port, and instead of just trying
what we said to see that it does indeed work,
AFAICT, this is a dead app. The base forum page [1] points to the
Google Play entry of the app, but that's a dead link. I haven't seen any other pointers to the actual app, i.e. APK or page in some (Android) app store.
So if you want people to *test* the app, you should first *find* the
app!
[1] <https://xdaforums.com/t/app-4-0-3-no-root-lan-drive-samba-filesharing-server-smb1-and-smb2.3790945/>
On 25 Apr 2025 18:34:54 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote :
Since Apple trolls depend on people not testing their answers
...says the idiot who refused to believe iOS can indeed (a) run an SMB
server, and (b) do so over the standard port, and instead of just trying
what we said to see that it does indeed work,
Well, to be fair Jolly Roger, you're a well-known Apple troll
says the troll who regularly slings schoolyard insults
Fucking loser.
On 25 Apr 2025 20:35:12 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote :
says the troll who regularly slings schoolyard insults
Apple trolls
defends the mothership to the death
defense to the death of the mothership only happens on Apple ngs
strange people like you
defend Apple to the point that you ceaselessly brazenly fabricate
imaginary mythical iOS functionality that simply never existed.
strange people constantly fabricate functionality
Fucking loser.
Jolly Roger wrote on 4/25/2025 5:23 PM:
Fucking loser.
So, that's pretty much all you have?
a weak troll
Jolly Roger wrote on 4/25/2025 5:23 PM:
Fucking loser.
Surely you can do better than this. Try to get alan to help you out
till your check comes.
On Fri, 25 Apr 2025 17:17:01 +0200, Arno Welzel wrote :
For those 3 wants, a SMB server on the iOS/Android device is the best >>> solution, because (AFAIK) iOS has no MTP support and PTP support is less >>> complete (can see less of the file system) than on Android.
With iOS this is indeed different as I learned.
But Android definitely does NOT allow to port 445 for apps as *server*
without root access and Windows is not able to connect to SMB shares on
non standard ports.
Hi Arno,
You've come to the same realization that I did, where initially I had
assumed that any SMB server on a mobile device used nonstandard ports.
What we've learned from this thread, and which is rather valuable
knowledge, is that while Android SMB servers must use non-standard ports
due to the nix-like restriction on privileged ports, it turns out that iOS servers actually, surprisingly, thankfully in fact, use privileged ports.
Who knew?
Not me. Nor you.
Now we're one and the same indeed.
Which is good because I would want every technical thread to add to the tribal knowledge of the OS groups participating in that thread.
I wrote a detailed tested summary of steps, which the Apple trolls will
claim is "too complicated" (because they count punctuation as complexity).
It's over here for anyone to reproduce my lab test results in toto.
<https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=20471&group=misc.phone.mobile.iphone#20471>
Oh. I see you responded to it (I haven't seen your response yet, but I see
it in the web server that I used to retrieve that URL for you).
So that lab test report is currently excellent for Android owners who doubt that iOS user-installed apps can bind to privileged ports (below 1024).
I'm happy my lab test report is of use to others as that's why I wrote it.
What we've learned from this thread, and which is rather valuable
knowledge, is that while Android SMB servers must use non-standard ports
due to the nix-like restriction on privileged ports, it turns out that iOS >> servers actually, surprisingly, thankfully in fact, use privileged ports.
Who knew?
Lots of people told you this was the case in the Apple newsgroups, but
you were too busy weak trolling to acknowledge it.
I know enough to realize what they call a "vaccine", even though I got it
many times myself, is decidedly NOT a vaccine by CDC's own definition.
Incorrect.
And I know enough to calculate that the report from the CDC itself (as I
recall) had the incidence of fatalities so low in children under 11 as to
be almost zero (I forget how many decimal places it was but it was a few). >>
Hence, I assessed that it's absurd, in my humble assessment, to inject kids >> under the age of 11
Fatal incidents of flu are similar in children and yet we give them the flu vaccine. Is that unnecessary also? I've met parents who've lost children to flu. Would you tell them the vaccine is unnecessary?
I vaguely remember you insisting on a "geofencing" requirement where my
claim, as I recall, was about a single point, not a fenced area, in that
Android free & ad-free apps can easily system-wide spoof the GPS location.
You recall incorrectly. I kinda guessed this elder story was made up at the time, as you thought you'd found another iOS gotcha. You can't remember it because it was a lie.
It was nothing to do with gps spoofing. That is not something I've ever
tried as It's of no interest to me, and I believe you that it's not
possible on ios. It was something to do with popping up a notification when someone left/returned home to turn off/switch on the wifi. Or something
like that.
This is a fact:
*Apple's iOS always has had more 0-day exploits than Android has.*
<https://www.cisa.gov/known-exploited-vulnerabilities-catalog>
Nope. That's an assertion.
This is an assessment of that fact:
*iOS is not more secure than Android is.*
It's a hypothesis based on the assumption that simply having a larger
number is worse without considering severity, exploitability nor length of time before patching. You may be correct, but so far you've provided
nothing.
Notice you can't dispute the fact (well, fools dispute all facts).
You've not provided any evidence. So there's nothing to dispute.
It's like asking people dispute the existence of santa in the summer.
Just remember that I teach you Apple trolls hundreds of facts about Apple >>>> per year
Lol. You're lucky if you achieve one fact a year.
Hmmm... it's a written promised fact, Chris. It's not a bias. It's a fact.
The fact is they wrote a statement making an ambition. There's no evidence yet that they have met that ambition.
It's like a kid promising to do their homework: Ill believe it when I see
it.
a. iOS promised full support = 5 years
Correction: >= 5 years
b. Samsung (S-series) & Google (Pixel) full promised support = 7 years
It's simply a fact that 7 years happens to be longer than 5 years, Chris.
Only an Apple troll would claim otherwise.
No-one has claimed otherwise.
On 25 Apr 2025 18:29:11 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote :
What we've learned from this thread, and which is rather valuable
knowledge, is that while Android SMB servers must use non-standard
ports due to the nix-like restriction on privileged ports, it turns
out that iOS servers actually, surprisingly, thankfully in fact, use
privileged ports.
Who knew?
Lots of people told you this was the case in the Apple newsgroups,
but you were too busy weak trolling to acknowledge it.
Heh heh heh... the credibility of an Apple troll is utterly worthless.
On 25 Apr 2025 18:11:00 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote :
AFAICT, this is a dead app. The base forum page [1] points to the
Google Play entry of the app, but that's a dead link. I haven't seen any
other pointers to the actual app, i.e. APK or page in some (Android) app
store.
So if you want people to *test* the app, you should first *find* the
app!
[1]
<https://xdaforums.com/t/app-4-0-3-no-root-lan-drive-samba-filesharing-server-smb1-and-smb2.3790945/>
Oh. Thanks. I didn't look. My bad. I apologize.
Thanks for looking. Clearly I didn't look (and the developer hasn't
responded to my post so maybe it's also a necro thread on XDA Developers).
It's worth noting that this particular SMB server app seems to claim it worked non root way back in 2018 but maybe something changed (or maybe my quick skim of the thread is wrong as maybe they never made that claim).
I listed elsewhere in this thread a handful of free/adfree Android SMB servers (see sig), but we can presume prima facie that they probably remap the port, or, if they bind to privileged ports, they do so when rooted.
Moving forward, the goal is always to sit at the PC and manage the mobile device as if it's seamlessly attached to the PC, where it would be nice if someone who knows more than I do can explain what might be different
between using SMB/FTP as a Windows "share" versus WebDAV as a "drive".
Here's are related charts, where what I like most about a WebDAV share is that it's automatic over the LAN, permanent, and seamless in scripts.
<https://i.postimg.cc/DZNvHqy9/chart-smbshare-vs-webdavdrive.jpg>
<https://i.postimg.cc/4yKdxWS4/chart-ftpshare-vs-webdavdrive.jpg>
But maybe SMB/FTP "shares" are as seamless as others seem to say they are?
Just a side note. Your post continued, but you did that below a line
that started with two dashes, a space, and the new line character.
That's the signature marker, and normal news clients put the text below
in light greyish colours difficult to read. And when replying, the text
below is removed.
So please do not use that line if you intend to post actual content
beneath it.
As you don't use a normal software, perhaps you did not notice.
They're quite different in that the injected RNA destroys your cells,
Chris, as your body transcribes it, belatedly releasing the antigens.
Thereby inducing an immunogenic response and protection from the virus. AKA
a vaccine.
Many, many predictions of woe have been made around the covid vaccines and none have materialised.
Given I know nothing of geofencing,
That was painfully clear.
I gave you tons of evidence over the years,
I just knew you wouldn't respond to this request, which I'm reminding you
of:
What we want, always, is for both mobile devices to work the same with Windows, which is you sit at the PC, and voila, your mobile device is seamlessly integrated with every app on Windows, not just file explorer.
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
Frank Slootweg, 2025-04-24 19:35:
[...]
For those 3 wants, a SMB server on the iOS/Android device is the best
solution, because (AFAIK) iOS has no MTP support and PTP support is less >>> complete (can see less of the file system) than on Android.
With iOS this is indeed different as I learned.
But Android definitely does NOT allow to port 445 for apps as *server*
without root access and Windows is not able to connect to SMB shares on
non standard ports.
I am well aware of that and actually *I* brought up that limitation,
so, as I - and others - mentioned, please follow the thread before commenting.
That said, Windows 11 (not 10) can probably use an Android SMB server
as a Network *Drive* (not Network Share) on a port greater than 1023 by
using the '/tcpport:' option of 'net use', but the jury is still out on
that one.
Frank Slootweg, 2025-04-25 17:50:
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
Frank Slootweg, 2025-04-24 19:35:
[...]
For those 3 wants, a SMB server on the iOS/Android device is the best >>> solution, because (AFAIK) iOS has no MTP support and PTP support is less >>> complete (can see less of the file system) than on Android.
With iOS this is indeed different as I learned.
But Android definitely does NOT allow to port 445 for apps as *server*
without root access and Windows is not able to connect to SMB shares on
non standard ports.
I am well aware of that and actually *I* brought up that limitation,
so, as I - and others - mentioned, please follow the thread before commenting.
That said, Windows 11 (not 10) can probably use an Android SMB server
as a Network *Drive* (not Network Share) on a port greater than 1023 by using the '/tcpport:' option of 'net use', but the jury is still out on that one.
It seems it doesn't. Output on Windows 11 for "net use /?":
[/TCPPORT:{0-65535}]
NET USE
[devicename | *] [\\computername\sharename[\volume] [password | *]]
[/USER:[domainname\]username]
[/USER:[dotted domain name\]username]
[/USER:[username@dotted domain name]
[/SMARTCARD]
[/SAVECRED]
[/REQUIREINTEGRITY]
[/REQUIREPRIVACY]
[/WRITETHROUGH]
[/TCPPORT:{0-65535}]
[/QUICPORT:{0-65535}]
[/RDMAPORT:{0-65535}]
[/TRANSPORT:{TCP | QUIC} [/SKIPCERTCHECK]]
[/REQUESTCOMPRESSION:{YES | NO}]
[/BLOCKNTLM]
[/GLOBAL]
[[/DELETE] [/GLOBAL]]]
NET USE {devicename | *} [password | *] /HOME
NET USE [/PERSISTENT:{YES | NO}]
It seems it doesn't. Output on Windows 11 for "net use /?":
Yes, it's there. See your own output (quoted below):
[/TCPPORT:{0-65535}]
But don't worry, I also overlooked it sometime.
Many thanks to Tyrone in particular for pointing out the Windows 11
feature, which I openly & humbly admit I was completely unaware of.
Likewise, many thanks to Chris, in particular, for pointing out that iOS always had the capability to bind to privileged ports, also which I was unaware of (and which I found hard to believe until I tested it myself).
I was merely pointing out yet another error on your part. You were using the completely made-up syntax of
net use D: \\192.168.1.10:445
on Windows. Which of course resulted in an error (because 192.168.1.10:445 is
not a valid IP address) and a failure to connect to the iOS SMB server. Which you then used as "proof" that the iOS SMB Server was NOT using port 445.
Likewise, many thanks to Chris, in particular, for pointing out that iOS
always had the capability to bind to privileged ports, also which I was
unaware of (and which I found hard to believe until I tested it myself).
Hard to believe? In fact, you called us liars and accused us of describing "imaginary functionality". For several days, it never even occurred to you to TRY the iOS SMB Server. You just KNEW we were wrong, because Android can't do
this. Therefore, the "inferior" iOS can't do it either.
You only FINALLY tried it when you could not prove us wrong after "googling furiously".
That said, Windows 11 (not 10) can probably use an Android SMB server
as a Network *Drive* (not Network Share) on a port greater than 1023 by
using the '/tcpport:' option of 'net use', but the jury is still out on
that one.
It seems it doesn't. Output on Windows 11 for "net use /?":
NET USE
[devicename | *] [\\computername\sharename[\volume] [password | *]]
[/USER:[domainname\]username]
[/USER:[dotted domain name\]username]
[/USER:[username@dotted domain name]
[/SMARTCARD]
[/SAVECRED]
[/REQUIREINTEGRITY]
[/REQUIREPRIVACY]
[/WRITETHROUGH]
[/TCPPORT:{0-65535}]
[/QUICPORT:{0-65535}]
[/RDMAPORT:{0-65535}]
[/TRANSPORT:{TCP | QUIC} [/SKIPCERTCHECK]]
[/REQUESTCOMPRESSION:{YES | NO}]
[/BLOCKNTLM]
[/GLOBAL]
[[/DELETE] [/GLOBAL]]]
NET USE {devicename | *} [password | *] /HOME
NET USE [/PERSISTENT:{YES | NO}]
Ah, but where's the antigen coming from, Chris?
You described it yourself, above.
I know how it works. But do you?
Absolutely.
Anyone who says this is just like a flu
vaccine has no idea that it's not even a vaccine, Chris. It's just not.
Reading comprehension is clearly not your strong suit. I said flu and covid have similar risks to children in terms of fatalities. Arguably, the risk
of long covid is far worse.
Follow the antigen.
And?
It doesn't meet the CDC's own definition of a vaccine.
Yes does. But again, why focus on words when empirical evidence tells you
all you need to know? Oh wait. It's because you don't care about evidence
you care about being right (sic).
Samsung has never supported a phone for 7 years. Apple has done for many years and many models. Yet you believe Samsung over Apple simply because
they made a promise. Anyone who believes corporate promises without
evidence has a screw loose.
But that's not what bothers me about the CDC promoting it for kids.
What bothers me is the CDC knows that if they told the truth, that it's NOT >> a vaccine (by their own definition!) then NOBODY would want to get it.
lol. sure. people aren't going to take a life-saving treatment simply
because of obsessive narrow-minded definition nazis.
Actually, some would. Just like people being encouraged not to wear masks because it was against their "freedom". jfc. Some people are simply beyond help.
So I get it why the CDC brazenly lies, but I don't have to like it.
If you get it, then why not explain it fully and clearly in a way most
people can understand? So far you're simply hand-waving about lying, RNA
and antigens.
On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 11:03:16 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote :
I know how it works. But do you?
Absolutely.
Where's the antigen in a flu vaccine, and where's the antigen in a polio vaccine, and where's the antigen in all the normal vaccines that people get versus... where's the antigen in this thing that the CDC wants kids to get?
Where's the antigen in a flu vaccine, and where's the antigen in a polio
vaccine, and where's the antigen in all the normal vaccines that people get >> versus... where's the antigen in this thing that the CDC wants kids to get?
A vaccine, is any mechanism that "trains" the human body to recognize
foreign material in the body. It can use any mechanism to do that.
The best vaccine designs, cause both short term stimulation and
a long term "memory" of the material.
For more info, see the specific Wiki.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polio_vaccine
Where's the antigen in a flu vaccine, and where's the antigen in a polio
vaccine, and where's the antigen in all the normal vaccines that people get >> versus... where's the antigen in this thing that the CDC wants kids to get?
You know full well as you described the process.
The body is exposed to
the antigen via transcription of the mRNA. The mRNA is a fragment of the whole COVID (tiny) genome sufficient to produce antigens, but not induce disease.
The vaccine mimics the COVID mechanism of disease. Thereby protecting those who receive it.
In my humble opinion, given this thing to kids who face almost no threat
whatsoever from the disease, is a travesty perpetuated by fear mongers.
Why is it fear mongering when children die? Sure, it's not many compared to the old and infirm. Does that mean they should die despite having an effective form of protection? It's only handful. They don't matter. Right?
Follow the antigen.
And?
Heh heh heh... if you don't know what that means, then you have no training >> whatsoever in immunology Chris. It's the most important distinction here.
I was inducing you to explain further. Not an expression of confusion.
Heh heh heh... I don't give a shit about "being right", Chris.
That's the only thing you care about.
Giving this thing to children who face almost no risk from the disease is, >> in my humble opinion, a travesty perpetuated upon us by fear mongers.
It's still some risk. Including death.
All I'm saying is I know where the antigen is Chris, while most people
likely do not - so they can't make an educated assessment of what it is.
Nor can you, it appears. Apparently the vector for inducing an immunogenic reaction is more important than the result.
Just because it doesn't fit your old fashioned definition, it's not valid. Reminder: science always moves forward. It might come as a shock but a 21st century vaccine is not that same as a 19th century one.
The government lied to the people on that,
No they didn't.
You should know that since anyone trained in microbiology has a ton of
experience being graded on their technique to prevent cross contamination.
They also have access to the most appropriate equipment. With a pandemic you've got to make do with what is available. All mitigation methods were useful: hand washing, masks, reduced contact with people, regular testing
and vaccination.
We had covid twice in our house. Only a single person ever got infected
each time. There was no need for N95 masks nor full cat 4 level containment methods.
Remember always, I'm not against the things - I'm against the lies.
Problem is you construct this world in your head where everyone is lying. They're not.
You know full well as you described the process.
Of course I know where the antigen is. But most people don't.
That's my point. There is no antigen in the thing for Covid.
On Sat, 26 Apr 2025 08:36:42 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote :
I know enough to realize what they call a "vaccine", even though
I got it many times myself, is decidedly NOT a vaccine by CDC's
own definition.
Incorrect.
Heh heh heh... did you ever look at the CDC's long-standing
definition? <https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/glossary/
index.html#heading-v>
Here it is, repeated verbatim, Chris. "A suspension of live (usually attenuated) or inactivated microorganisms (e.g., bacteria or
viruses), fractions of the agent, or genetic material of the
administered to induce immunity and prevent infectious diseases and
their sequelae. Some vaccines contain highly defined antigens (e.g.,
the polysaccharide of Haemophilus influenzae type b or the surface
antigen of hepatitis B); others have antigens that are complex or incompletely defined (e.g. Bordetella pertussis antigens or live
attenuated viruses)."
Since you have a (claimed) doctorate in the medical sciences, you
should be able to spot the fatal flaws when seeking to comprehend
what they mean by "genetic material" & "antigen" since you took
immunology & genetics, Chris.
I get it that the uneducated think they mean "RNA" when they say
"genetic material" but that's NOT how these novel Covid RNA
injections work Chris.
They're quite different in that the injected RNA destroys your
cells, Chris, as your body transcribes it, belatedly releasing the
antigens.
And I know enough to calculate that the report from the CDC
itself (as I recall) had the incidence of fatalities so low in
children under 11 as to be almost zero (I forget how many
decimal places it was but it was a few).
Hence, I assessed that it's absurd, in my humble assessment, to
inject kids under the age of 11
Fatal incidents of flu are similar in children and yet we give
them the flu vaccine. Is that unnecessary also? I've met parents
who've lost children to flu. Would you tell them the vaccine is
unnecessary?
The thing you call a vaccine is NOT a vaccine by the CDC's own
definition, where it's an experimental injection that can have
future repercussions.
To experiment on innocent children who face virtually no threat from
the Covid disease is a crime, in my book - but that's something
parents who are well educated will have to decide for themselves,
given kids are essentially already protected. The problem is many
people are NOT well educated, and that's where I fault the CDC for
not explaining this to them.
The government is lying to those parents who don't understand how it
works. That's always my beef with Apple too, Chris.
I don't mind Apple trying to sell their products. What I mind are
the brazen lies.
I vaguely remember you insisting on a "geofencing" requirement
where my claim, as I recall, was about a single point, not a
fenced area, in that Android free & ad-free apps can easily
system-wide spoof the GPS location.
You recall incorrectly. I kinda guessed this elder story was made
up at the time, as you thought you'd found another iOS gotcha. You
can't remember it because it was a lie.
WTF?
It was nothing to do with gps spoofing. That is not something I've
ever tried as It's of no interest to me, and I believe you that
it's not possible on ios. It was something to do with popping up a
notification when someone left/returned home to turn off/switch on
the wifi. Or something like that.
Well, I don't even do geofencing, except that I sometimes spoof my
Android version and API level and country location to obtain APKs
from the repos.
So for you to claim I didn't admit a factual mistake when I don't
even do geofencing is kind of odd - so it's no wonder I didn't
respond to you.
Given I know nothing of geofencing, nor do I have the need, if you
want to post your supposed factual claims to the Apple newsgroup,
you know how to do that. I'll look at your supposed factual claims
and decide how to respond, but bear in mind, I can't even spell
geofencing, so I doubt I will add much value to your claims,
whatever they may turn out to be in that thread.
This is a fact: *Apple's iOS always has had more 0-day exploits
than Android has.* <https://www.cisa.gov/known-exploited-
vulnerabilities-catalog>
Nope. That's an assertion.
Heh heh heh... you Apple trolls can't count.
This is an assessment of that fact: *iOS is not more secure than
Android is.*
It's a hypothesis based on the assumption that simply having a
larger number is worse without considering severity,
exploitability nor length of time before patching. You may be
correct, but so far you've provided nothing.
Ah. Well, that's valid, Chris. Just a larger number is only one
measurement of how insecure Apple devices are. The fact most are in
the kernel is another datapoint, and the fact that the mandatory
webkit has the second most, is another datapoint. That many are zero-
click exploits is yet another datapoint, so I don't disagree with
you that there are factors to consider.
On Tue, 29 Apr 2025 02:16:05 -0000 (UTC), Marion wrote :
You know full well as you described the process.
Of course I know where the antigen is. But most people don't.
That's my point. There is no antigen in the thing for Covid.
I wonder how many of the billions of people on this planet know that the
mRNA injected has never existed inside the viral genome in the history of
the universe. That injected mRNA is completely foreign to the viral genome.
Put more deeply, the specific mRNA molecule introduced by the thing we call
a vaccine, even if it were an exact copy of the spike protein-encoding sequence in the viral genome (which, it isn't due to purposeful
engineering), has never existed in that isolated, formulated state within
an actual SARS-CoV-2 virus in the history of the universe.
It's a product of biotechnology, designed for a specific purpose: to
instruct our cells to produce a single viral protein in a controlled manner to trigger an immune response without causing infection.
But it's NOT a component of the virus. It can't be.
So it's NOT an antigen of the virus.
It has NEVER existed in the viral genome.
How many people in this world understand what I just explained above?
You're
running out of arguments so you're creating desperate analogies.
No one is lying.
You're intentionally misinterpreting a well understood definition.
Let's operate on all children and remove their adenoids, just because they >> can get infected, Chris. It's absurd. It defies standard medical logic.
Again you're the one being absurd. There's a risk/benefit calculation. Am operation is highly risky (and expensive). A vaccine is very low risk (and cheap). There's no sensible comparison, here.
Well, it doesn't meet the CDC definition of a vaccine.
That's not up to me. That's up to the CDC.
It is up to you. You are choosing to believe it isn't a vaccine when the whole medical community does.
You can't even explain *why* it's a lie. Give it up.
They're quite different in that the injected RNA destroys your
cells, Chris, as your body transcribes it, belatedly releasing the
antigens.
I'd like to see the citation for that assertion, please.
On Tue, 29 Apr 2025 07:37:57 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote :
You're
running out of arguments so you're creating desperate analogies.
Funny thing Chris, my position has never changed since it's based on
logical assessment of fact. The facts never change, Chris.
#1. The thing they call a vaccine contains no antigen, period.
#2. Children (under 11) have almost no risk from the Covid disease.
No one is lying.
The CDC *changed* its definition of "vaccine" in September 2021.
Then the CDC *changed* its definition *again* on August 10, 2024.
Funny, it's almost like Apple in terms of after-the-fact lies.
You're intentionally misinterpreting a well understood definition.
Did you see Paul's argument that this thing is the same as a polio vaccine? Yet, that vaccine contains an actual antigen, as do all other vaccines.
This thing, does not.
This thing is mRNA.
Viruses do not have any mRNA, Chris.
So this thing has never appeared in any viral genome in the universe.
On Tue, 29 Apr 2025 09:43:33 -0700, Alan wrote:
They're quite different in that the injected RNA destroys your
cells, Chris, as your body transcribes it, belatedly releasing the
antigens.
I'd like to see the citation for that assertion, please.
Idiot.
That's how every virus works, even when it's just mrna that causes your
body to make the virus. Every virus kills every cell that it infected.
How do you think the newly made virus gets out of the cell you moron.
How do you think the newly made virus gets out of the cell you moron.
What's more, even if the mRNA vaccine does cause the death of a few
cells, who cares?
On Tue, 29 Apr 2025 12:11:25 -0700, Alan wrote:
How do you think the newly made virus gets out of the cell you moron.
What's more, even if the mRNA vaccine does cause the death of a few
cells, who cares?
You're the idiot that said the vaccine didn't cause the death of the cells. Every single muscle cell uptaking mRNA is destroyed by your immune system.
That you don't know that is not what makes you an idiot.
That you disputed what everyone else knows is what makes you the idiot.
Everyone appreciates your hard work.
On Tue, 29 Apr 2025 16:56:44 -0700, Alan wrote:
You're the idiot that said the vaccine didn't cause the death of the
cells.
Every single muscle cell uptaking mRNA is destroyed by your immune
system.
Ummmmmm... ...you're going to have to support that one.
That you don't know that is not what makes you an idiot.
That you disputed what everyone else knows is what makes you the idiot.
What is the mechanism for that?
First you claimed that:
That's how every virus works, even when it's just mrna that causes
your body to make the virus. Every virus kills every cell that it
infected.
Well the mRNA vaccine DOESN'T "make the virus".
It makes a spike protein on the outside of the virus; not the whole
thing.
That you don't know this makes YOU the idiot, idiot.
Idiot.
Following injection, human cells take up the mRNA, which is then translated into viral proteins. These proteins are subsequently displayed on the cell surface, triggering an immune response that causes the destruction of the infected cells.
Everyone knows this. Except idiots like you.
You're the idiot that said the vaccine didn't cause the death of the cells. >> Every single muscle cell uptaking mRNA is destroyed by your immune system.
Ummmmmm... ...you're going to have to support that one.
That you don't know that is not what makes you an idiot.
That you disputed what everyone else knows is what makes you the idiot.
What is the mechanism for that?
First you claimed that:
That's how every virus works, even when it's just mrna that causes your
body to make the virus. Every virus kills every cell that it infected.
Well the mRNA vaccine DOESN'T "make the virus".
It makes a spike protein on the outside of the virus; not the whole thing.
That you don't know this makes YOU the idiot, idiot.
The CDC *changed* its definition of "vaccine" in September 2021.
Then the CDC *changed* its definition *again* on August 10, 2024.
So what? Definitions change with knowledge discovery. That isn't lying.
Was Newton lying when he first described gravity?
Was the heliocentric universe a lie?
Was the central dogma a lie?
How has the definition changed in 2021 and 2024?
Viruses do not have any mRNA, Chris.
Dear oh dear. SARS-CoV-2 is a positive strand, single stranded RNA virus.
The RNA genome functions exactly like mRNA in that it is directly
translated to create virons. mRNA is the nomenclature for when a genome is DNA-based and a gene needs to be transcribed to (m)RNA to then be
translated to the protein product. With an RNA genome there's no need for mRNA, for very obvious reasons.
So this thing has never appeared in any viral genome in the universe.
Cite?[1]
You should know that because all well-educated people know that.
It's just a fact.
It is not. You misunderstand.
Do you agree with the fact that the risk of fatalities from Covid for
children under the age of 11 is almost zero or not, Chris?
That's a very poorly framed question. Define "almost zero".
Do you mean in
absolute or relative terms? Today or at the height of the pandemic?
Globally or nationally.
Child deaths in car accidents (as a passenger) are also "almost zero".
Think about that before you answer.
Yes. Or no please.
Ask a properly framed question first.
Do you see the inclusion of "or genetic material of the administered"
gobbledygook? The CDC is not stupid. Neither am I. Neither are you.
No idea why you think a typo requires a PhD to interpret. Yeah, it's got a mistake in it. Kinda funny but not a lie.
They know it's a meaningless phrase they inserted to get an opportunity to >> insert the words "genetic material" as if the genetic material is from the >> viral genome.
Well, it is derived from the genetic sequence of the genome.
Yet we all know that it's not.
Apparently, only you are genius enough to know otherwise.
I know the facts. Hence my logical assessment is based on the facts.
It constantly amuses me how people with the least capacity to understand "facts" overuse the word so much.
I assess the facts as a deliberate obfuscation, conflating the mechanism of >> traditional vaccines with the admittedly novel approach of mRNA vaccines,
and potentially misleading the public about the origin of the genetic
material in the latter.
You're the only person doing the misleading.
I am well enough educated to feel strongly that the CDC's use of the term
"vaccine" for mRNA products is a misnomer and that it was a deliberate
choice to make them more acceptable to the public.
I'm afraid you're overconfident of your knowledge (c.f. Darwin). Plus
you're misappropriating error as malice.
The CDC are not the global and
final arbiters of what is or is not a vaccine.
They provide a guide to help
the public and perhaps some sectors of the scientific community. Admittedly the vaccine definition in their website is currently broken. Someone should tell them, although I suspect they have much bigger problems to deal with from within at the moment.
But my assessment is still logically sensible as it is based on facts.
Applying logic correctly based on flawed assumptions does not result in accurate assessments.
[1] your statement is impossible to cite as it is impossible to prove. Your exaggeration is shooting yourself in the face.
Following injection, human cells take up the mRNA, which is then translated >> into viral proteins. These proteins are subsequently displayed on the cell >> surface, triggering an immune response that causes the destruction of the
infected cells.
Everyone knows this. Except idiots like you.
You mean like how everyone knows that "it's mrna that causes your body
to make the virus."?
Like that, idiot?
On Tue, 29 Apr 2025 18:10:08 -0700, Alan wrote:
Following injection, human cells take up the mRNA, which is then
translated
into viral proteins. These proteins are subsequently displayed on the
cell
surface, triggering an immune response that causes the destruction of
the
infected cells.
Everyone knows this. Except idiots like you.
You mean like how everyone knows that "it's mrna that causes your body
to make the virus."?
Like that, idiot?
You calling me an idiot after it was you who claimed that the body does not target for death any cell which presents the spike proteins, is funny.
Marion <marion@facts.com> wrote:
On Tue, 29 Apr 2025 22:14:37 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote :
How has the definition changed in 2021 and 2024?
The
Will you just answer the fucking question?!
Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine was initially granted Emergency Use
Authorization by the FDA on December 11, 2020 and the CDC approved it on
December 12, 2020 and then for more general use on August 23, 2021.
The CDC has no role in approving COVID vaccines nor any other medical treatment. It's purely the FDA.
After that fact, the CDC *changed* its definition of "vaccine" in September >> 2021 by focusing on "stimulating the body's immune response", which was a
prep for the 2nd pre-planned change.
What did it say *exactly*?
Big deal. It's a website reflecting current understanding for the benefit
of public. Global scientists don't sit at their benches waiting for the CDC to issue decrees.
You're putting way too much authority on a simple public information
system.
More recently, the CDC again *changed* its definition on August 10, 2024 to >> add "genetic material" in between meaningless gobblydygook.
You, of all people, should know this because we've discussed the CDC
approved this 'thing' well before they changed their definition of what a
vaccine is.
The CDC is the US approved nothing. Plus, your US-centric bias is blinding you to the fact all of your footstomping is irrelevant in the rest of the world. The vaccine is not magically different inthe US.
Positive sense RNA genomesViruses do not have any mRNA, Chris.
Dear oh dear. SARS-CoV-2 is a positive strand, single stranded RNA virus. >>> The RNA genome functions exactly like mRNA in that it is directly
translated to create virons. mRNA is the nomenclature for when a genome is >>> DNA-based and a gene needs to be transcribed to (m)RNA to then be
translated to the protein product. With an RNA genome there's no need for >>> mRNA, for very obvious reasons.
act very much like mRNA but are not mRNA (otherwise they'd be called mRNA).
You're simply repeating what I wrote, but with less understanding. Read
again what I wrote and update your comprehension.
So this thing has never appeared in any viral genome in the universe.
Cite?[1]
I've provided this cite to you in the past, Chris, when you ridiculed my
statement that the SARS-COV-2 viral genome was considered to be large.
*Replication of the coronavirus genome: A paradox among positive-strand RNA viruses*
<https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8994683/>
Irrelevant cite. There's not even any mention of the vaccine.
You should know that because all well-educated people know that.
It's just a fact.
It is not. You misunderstand.
The 30K subunit positive-sense RNA acts like mRNA but it is NOT mRNA Chris. >>
What we call mRNA is a smaller transcript of a specific gene that carries
the instructions for making a single protein or a few related proteins.
It's called +ssRNA expressly to avoid confusion with a host's mRNAs.
No it isn't. It's called *messenger* RNA because the source (i.e. DNA)
can't be translated directly for a variety of reasons. RNA genomes have no need for a messenger, obviously, and are functionally identical.
Do you agree with the fact that the risk of fatalities from Covid for
children under the age of 11 is almost zero or not, Chris?
That's a very poorly framed question. Define "almost zero".
That's odd
Just answer the question.
Do you mean in
absolute or relative terms? Today or at the height of the pandemic?
Globally or nationally.
Generally I mean in the USA (or in developed countries) since in some areas >> of the world, the life expectancy is such that people die of everything.
You should have a look at the US mortality statistics before looking down
at other countries. Especially in neonates.
Child deaths in car accidents (as a passenger) are also "almost zero".
Think about that before you answer.
Exactly my point. So let's outlaw cars because children can die in them.
That's YOUR argument.
Whoosh! This is why you're impossible to argue with. You only see your own viewpoint.
That is categorically not my argument. Try again.
There's no way it's a mistake, Chris. Impossible.
It's only "impossible" because the alternative doesn't fit your world view.
Occam's razor tells you it's definitely a mistake.
My assessments are based on facts, Chris:
FACT 1: The "thing" called a vaccine was approved before they changed the
definition of what a vaccine is, and, what this thing is, does not work
like any other vaccine does that is known to man. That's just a fact.
It's not a thing. It is a new modality for vaccines, but it's still a vaccine.
FACT 2: Kids have an almost zero chance of dying from Covid. That's a fact.
Poorly defined.
FACT 3: The CDC changed the definition of a vaccine AFTER they approved the >> thing they called a vaccine all along. They changed it twice (AFAIK).
The CDC don't do vaccine approvals.
FACT 4. The cell dies that expresses the viral spike protein, simply
because your immune system will attack it with no quarter asked nor given.
I mean that's exactly what you want to immune system to do. If not you'd be immune compromised.
1/4 isn't a great return on your "FACTS". lol.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 507 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 184:54:38 |
| Calls: | 9,958 |
| Files: | 13,825 |
| Messages: | 6,355,759 |
