XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 20:00:52 -0700, Tom Elam wrote :
LOL. An under $50 Android has tiny storage capacity, cannot run the
latest OS, has an outdated processor, and cannot multitask worth a damn.
I know. I bought one like that as a burner phone on a New Zealand
vacation. Piece of shit if there ever was one.
BUT, if it is all you can afford then I glad you have that option.
Heh heh heh... again, your argument is absurd since you think paying $1000
for a phone in and of itself makes it more functional than not paying that.
A diamond-encrusted RED!!!!! Rolex doesn't tell time better than a Timex.
Most of the cost is in bullshit marketing meaningless differentiation.
And Apple profits.
Compare my three 2021 Samsung Galaxy A32-5G Androids (SM-A326U) which cost
me (& anyone else on T-Mo postpaid) about $28.20 to any iPhones ever made.
<
https://i.postimg.cc/YC1B906F/tmopromo01.jpg>
I don't know what you paid, but let's assume about $900 + tax.
Then you paid about $1000 for your iPhone (including tax), right?
I paid about $30 for my Android phone(s) which is well documented.
What matters. Is FUNCTIONALITY.
How is it a $30 Android has more functionality than any iPhone ever made?
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
