Groups > comp.mobile.android > #141174 > unrolled thread

Why are iPhone videos clear when sent to iPhones but blurry when sent to Android?

Started by	Andrew <andrew@spam.net>
First post	2024-05-16 22:12 +0000
Last post	2024-05-18 17:03 +0000
Articles	20 on this page of 94 — 10 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.mobile.android

Page 2 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 Next page →

#141217

From	Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com>
Date	2024-05-17 13:22 -0700
Message-ID	<v28e9e$2buq2$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#141214

On 2024-05-17 13:16, Andrew wrote:
> Frank Slootweg wrote on 17 May 2024 19:49:16 GMT :
> 
>>> I'm not a bad problem solver, so I might find a workaround which doesn't
>>> require the IPhone sender to change their habits just for me to receive a
>>> decent video from them.
>>
>>    I'm quite sure you can't "solve" the problem, because it requires the
>> *sender*'s device (iPhone) to do things differently and that is beyond
>> *your* control (and BTW also beyond his).
>>
>>    But by all means, eat your heart out and experiment away.
> 
> Thanks for your advice, where solving and working around issues are two
> different things, where I agree I can't solve the problem - but I am damn
> good at finding workarounds to every problem that I care to address.
> 
> But I need to understand better how the iPhone sends video first.
> 
> I worked in the Silicon Valley on industrial software considered munitions,
> so I'm not bad at workarounds - although I had a lot of training for that.
> 
> With Apple products, I don't have any formal training on how they work,
> so all that I know about them is what I experience myself dealing with
> them. https://i.postimg.cc/rwD6NrKX/ipadsandiphone.jpg
> 
> However, I think I have a workaround to the problem given out of those four
> Apple iOS devices, one of them might be repurposed as a video receiver.
> 
> 1. The iPhone is registered to another AppleID which I need to remove
>     (but only after I take all the data off that iPhone first).
> 
> 2. The "Activation Required!" iPad at left was bricked by Apple because
>     I ran an experiment by not logging into Apple servers for two years.
>     Since it was a gift, I can't prove it's mine so Apple declined to
>     allow me to activate it - again giving proof to Apples lies about
>     privacy since I had to show my government ID to the Genius Bar worker
>     before they would even look at it.

Because they suspected you of having a stolen device, Arlen.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141225

From	Hank Rogers <Hank@nospam.invalid>
Date	2024-05-17 17:17 -0500
Message-ID	<v28l23$2d8pt$2@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#141217

Alan wrote:
> On 2024-05-17 13:16, Andrew wrote:
>> Frank Slootweg wrote on 17 May 2024 19:49:16 GMT :
>>
>>>> I'm not a bad problem solver, so I might find a workaround which doesn't
>>>> require the IPhone sender to change their habits just for me to receive a
>>>> decent video from them.
>>>
>>>    I'm quite sure you can't "solve" the problem, because it requires the
>>> *sender*'s device (iPhone) to do things differently and that is beyond
>>> *your* control (and BTW also beyond his).
>>>
>>>    But by all means, eat your heart out and experiment away.
>>
>> Thanks for your advice, where solving and working around issues are two
>> different things, where I agree I can't solve the problem - but I am damn
>> good at finding workarounds to every problem that I care to address.
>>
>> But I need to understand better how the iPhone sends video first.
>>
>> I worked in the Silicon Valley on industrial software considered munitions,
>> so I'm not bad at workarounds - although I had a lot of training for that.
>>
>> With Apple products, I don't have any formal training on how they work,
>> so all that I know about them is what I experience myself dealing with
>> them. https://i.postimg.cc/rwD6NrKX/ipadsandiphone.jpg
>>
>> However, I think I have a workaround to the problem given out of those four
>> Apple iOS devices, one of them might be repurposed as a video receiver.
>>
>> 1. The iPhone is registered to another AppleID which I need to remove
>>     (but only after I take all the data off that iPhone first).
>>
>> 2. The "Activation Required!" iPad at left was bricked by Apple because
>>     I ran an experiment by not logging into Apple servers for two years.
>>     Since it was a gift, I can't prove it's mine so Apple declined to
>>     allow me to activate it - again giving proof to Apples lies about
>>     privacy since I had to show my government ID to the Genius Bar worker
>>     before they would even look at it.
> 
> Because they suspected you of having a stolen device, Arlen.

Why wasn't he arrested?

The sorry bastard should be in jail, right?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141228

From	Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com>
Date	2024-05-17 15:55 -0700
Message-ID	<v28n90$2dlvs$3@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#141225

On 2024-05-17 15:17, Hank Rogers wrote:
> Alan wrote:
>> On 2024-05-17 13:16, Andrew wrote:
>>> Frank Slootweg wrote on 17 May 2024 19:49:16 GMT :
>>>
>>>>> I'm not a bad problem solver, so I might find a workaround which 
>>>>> doesn't
>>>>> require the IPhone sender to change their habits just for me to 
>>>>> receive a
>>>>> decent video from them.
>>>>
>>>>    I'm quite sure you can't "solve" the problem, because it requires 
>>>> the
>>>> *sender*'s device (iPhone) to do things differently and that is beyond
>>>> *your* control (and BTW also beyond his).
>>>>
>>>>    But by all means, eat your heart out and experiment away.
>>>
>>> Thanks for your advice, where solving and working around issues are two
>>> different things, where I agree I can't solve the problem - but I am 
>>> damn
>>> good at finding workarounds to every problem that I care to address.
>>>
>>> But I need to understand better how the iPhone sends video first.
>>>
>>> I worked in the Silicon Valley on industrial software considered 
>>> munitions,
>>> so I'm not bad at workarounds - although I had a lot of training for 
>>> that.
>>>
>>> With Apple products, I don't have any formal training on how they work,
>>> so all that I know about them is what I experience myself dealing with
>>> them. https://i.postimg.cc/rwD6NrKX/ipadsandiphone.jpg
>>>
>>> However, I think I have a workaround to the problem given out of 
>>> those four
>>> Apple iOS devices, one of them might be repurposed as a video receiver.
>>>
>>> 1. The iPhone is registered to another AppleID which I need to remove
>>>     (but only after I take all the data off that iPhone first).
>>>
>>> 2. The "Activation Required!" iPad at left was bricked by Apple because
>>>     I ran an experiment by not logging into Apple servers for two years.
>>>     Since it was a gift, I can't prove it's mine so Apple declined to
>>>     allow me to activate it - again giving proof to Apples lies about
>>>     privacy since I had to show my government ID to the Genius Bar 
>>> worker
>>>     before they would even look at it.
>>
>> Because they suspected you of having a stolen device, Arlen.
> 
> Why wasn't he arrested?
> 
> The sorry bastard should be in jail, right?

Because "suspicion" isn't the same as proof.

They wanted his ID so that if it turned OUT that the device was stolen, 
they could point the police in the right direction.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141238

From	Hank Rogers <Hank@nospam.invalid>
Date	2024-05-17 19:22 -0500
Message-ID	<v28sck$2ehcc$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#141228

Alan wrote:
> On 2024-05-17 15:17, Hank Rogers wrote:
>> Alan wrote:
>>> On 2024-05-17 13:16, Andrew wrote:
>>>> Frank Slootweg wrote on 17 May 2024 19:49:16 GMT :
>>>>
>>>>>> I'm not a bad problem solver, so I might find a workaround which doesn't
>>>>>> require the IPhone sender to change their habits just for me to 
>>>>>> receive a
>>>>>> decent video from them.
>>>>>
>>>>> Â Â  I'm quite sure you can't "solve" the problem, because it requires 
>>>>> the
>>>>> *sender*'s device (iPhone) to do things differently and that is beyond
>>>>> *your* control (and BTW also beyond his).
>>>>>
>>>>> Â Â  But by all means, eat your heart out and experiment away.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for your advice, where solving and working around issues are two
>>>> different things, where I agree I can't solve the problem - but I am damn
>>>> good at finding workarounds to every problem that I care to address.
>>>>
>>>> But I need to understand better how the iPhone sends video first.
>>>>
>>>> I worked in the Silicon Valley on industrial software considered 
>>>> munitions,
>>>> so I'm not bad at workarounds - although I had a lot of training for that.
>>>>
>>>> With Apple products, I don't have any formal training on how they work,
>>>> so all that I know about them is what I experience myself dealing with
>>>> them. https://i.postimg.cc/rwD6NrKX/ipadsandiphone.jpg
>>>>
>>>> However, I think I have a workaround to the problem given out of those 
>>>> four
>>>> Apple iOS devices, one of them might be repurposed as a video receiver.
>>>>
>>>> 1. The iPhone is registered to another AppleID which I need to remove
>>>> Â Â Â  (but only after I take all the data off that iPhone first).
>>>>
>>>> 2. The "Activation Required!" iPad at left was bricked by Apple because
>>>> Â Â Â  I ran an experiment by not logging into Apple servers for two 
>>>> years.
>>>> Â Â Â  Since it was a gift, I can't prove it's mine so Apple declined to
>>>> Â Â Â  allow me to activate it - again giving proof to Apples lies about
>>>> Â Â Â  privacy since I had to show my government ID to the Genius Bar 
>>>> worker
>>>> Â Â Â  before they would even look at it.
>>>
>>> Because they suspected you of having a stolen device, Arlen.
>>
>> Why wasn't he arrested?
>>
>> The sorry bastard should be in jail, right?
> 
> Because "suspicion" isn't the same as proof.
> 
> They wanted his ID so that if it turned OUT that the device was stolen, 
> they could point the police in the right direction.
> 

So, it turned out he was innocent?

Hard to believe, since he hates apple with all his soul.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141245

From	Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com>
Date	2024-05-17 18:01 -0700
Message-ID	<v28ukq$2erec$2@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#141238

On 2024-05-17 17:22, Hank Rogers wrote:
> Alan wrote:
>> On 2024-05-17 15:17, Hank Rogers wrote:
>>> Alan wrote:
>>>> On 2024-05-17 13:16, Andrew wrote:
>>>>> Frank Slootweg wrote on 17 May 2024 19:49:16 GMT :
>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm not a bad problem solver, so I might find a workaround which 
>>>>>>> doesn't
>>>>>>> require the IPhone sender to change their habits just for me to 
>>>>>>> receive a
>>>>>>> decent video from them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Â Â  I'm quite sure you can't "solve" the problem, because it 
>>>>>> requires the
>>>>>> *sender*'s device (iPhone) to do things differently and that is 
>>>>>> beyond
>>>>>> *your* control (and BTW also beyond his).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Â Â  But by all means, eat your heart out and experiment away.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for your advice, where solving and working around issues are 
>>>>> two
>>>>> different things, where I agree I can't solve the problem - but I 
>>>>> am damn
>>>>> good at finding workarounds to every problem that I care to address.
>>>>>
>>>>> But I need to understand better how the iPhone sends video first.
>>>>>
>>>>> I worked in the Silicon Valley on industrial software considered 
>>>>> munitions,
>>>>> so I'm not bad at workarounds - although I had a lot of training 
>>>>> for that.
>>>>>
>>>>> With Apple products, I don't have any formal training on how they 
>>>>> work,
>>>>> so all that I know about them is what I experience myself dealing with
>>>>> them. https://i.postimg.cc/rwD6NrKX/ipadsandiphone.jpg
>>>>>
>>>>> However, I think I have a workaround to the problem given out of 
>>>>> those four
>>>>> Apple iOS devices, one of them might be repurposed as a video 
>>>>> receiver.
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. The iPhone is registered to another AppleID which I need to remove
>>>>> Â Â Â  (but only after I take all the data off that iPhone first).
>>>>>
>>>>> 2. The "Activation Required!" iPad at left was bricked by Apple 
>>>>> because
>>>>> Â Â Â  I ran an experiment by not logging into Apple servers for 
>>>>> two years.
>>>>> Â Â Â  Since it was a gift, I can't prove it's mine so Apple 
>>>>> declined to
>>>>> Â Â Â  allow me to activate it - again giving proof to Apples lies 
>>>>> about
>>>>> Â Â Â  privacy since I had to show my government ID to the Genius 
>>>>> Bar worker
>>>>> Â Â Â  before they would even look at it.
>>>>
>>>> Because they suspected you of having a stolen device, Arlen.
>>>
>>> Why wasn't he arrested?
>>>
>>> The sorry bastard should be in jail, right?
>>
>> Because "suspicion" isn't the same as proof.
>>
>> They wanted his ID so that if it turned OUT that the device was 
>> stolen, they could point the police in the right direction.
>>
> 
> So, it turned out he was innocent?

No. It turned out that no one (apparently) reported the device stolen.

Which is not the same thing.

> 
> Hard to believe, since he hates apple with all his soul.
> 
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141246

From	Andrew <andrew@spam.net>
Date	2024-05-18 01:04 +0000
Message-ID	<v28ur6$brs$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>
In reply to	#141238

Hank Rogers wrote on Fri, 17 May 2024 19:22:44 -0500 :

>> They wanted his ID so that if it turned OUT that the device was stolen, 
>> they could point the police in the right direction.
>> 
> 
> So, it turned out he was innocent?
> 
> Hard to believe, since he hates apple with all his soul.

Whoa. I do not hate Apple. I don't like Apple but I don't like Google or
Microsoft either. But there's no difference to me. I simply tell the truth.

And, Apple told me its their policy that you need two things for them to
unbrick a device that they themselves bricked because I didn't log into it
for more than two years (even though the login/password were correct).

1. Proof of ownership
2. Government ID (which they copy) 

So much for privacy on Apple devices.

Notice they unbricked the one that I bought at that store.
But they wouldn't unbrick the one I couldn't prove was mine.

Now let's look at this from an adult viewpoint since apparently Alan Baker
has been claiming I stole the iPad that I brought to Apple to unbrick.

Only Alan Baker would say that someone would do that, because if it was
stolen, there's been plenty of time for Apple to be informed of that.

Since they have my ID, they could call the cops at any time should it be
reported stolen in the future. The point is Alan Baker is a moron.

What he's doing is making kindergarten excuses for Apple's behavior.
But I do enjoy your wit as I have Alan Baker & Jughead in my killfile.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141252

From	Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com>
Date	2024-05-17 18:13 -0700
Message-ID	<v28vbv$2f10f$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#141246

On 2024-05-17 18:04, Andrew wrote:
> Hank Rogers wrote on Fri, 17 May 2024 19:22:44 -0500 :
> 
>>> They wanted his ID so that if it turned OUT that the device was stolen,
>>> they could point the police in the right direction.
>>>
>>
>> So, it turned out he was innocent?
>>
>> Hard to believe, since he hates apple with all his soul.
> 
> Whoa. I do not hate Apple. I don't like Apple but I don't like Google or
> Microsoft either. But there's no difference to me. I simply tell the truth.
> 
> And, Apple told me its their policy that you need two things for them to
> unbrick a device that they themselves bricked because I didn't log into it
> for more than two years (even though the login/password were correct).
> 
> 1. Proof of ownership
> 2. Government ID (which they copy)
> 
> So much for privacy on Apple devices.

You think that people should be able to get a device unlocked WITHOUT 
proof of ownership?

> 
> Notice they unbricked the one that I bought at that store.
> But they wouldn't unbrick the one I couldn't prove was mine.

You couldn't prove that you didn't steal it.

> 
> Now let's look at this from an adult viewpoint since apparently Alan Baker
> has been claiming I stole the iPad that I brought to Apple to unbrick.

Nope. That is NOT what I claimed, Liar.

> 
> Only Alan Baker would say that someone would do that, because if it was
> stolen, there's been plenty of time for Apple to be informed of that.
> 
> Since they have my ID, they could call the cops at any time should it be
> reported stolen in the future. The point is Alan Baker is a moron.
> 
> What he's doing is making kindergarten excuses for Apple's behavior.
> But I do enjoy your wit as I have Alan Baker & Jughead in my killfile.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141253 — How stupid is Arlen? (was Re: Why are iPhone videos clear when sent to iPhones but blurry when sent to Android?

From	Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com>
Date	2024-05-17 18:18 -0700
Subject	How stupid is Arlen? (was Re: Why are iPhone videos clear when sent to iPhones but blurry when sent to Android?
Message-ID	<v28vkg$2f27m$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#141246

He expected someone to unlock a device he couldn't prove he owned!

On 2024-05-17 18:04, Andrew wrote:
> Hank Rogers wrote on Fri, 17 May 2024 19:22:44 -0500 :
> 
>>> They wanted his ID so that if it turned OUT that the device was stolen,
>>> they could point the police in the right direction.
>>>
>>
>> So, it turned out he was innocent?
>>
>> Hard to believe, since he hates apple with all his soul.
> 
> Whoa. I do not hate Apple. I don't like Apple but I don't like Google or
> Microsoft either. But there's no difference to me. I simply tell the truth.
> 
> And, Apple told me its their policy that you need two things for them to
> unbrick a device that they themselves bricked because I didn't log into it
> for more than two years (even though the login/password were correct).
> 
> 1. Proof of ownership
> 2. Government ID (which they copy)
> 
> So much for privacy on Apple devices.
> 
> Notice they unbricked the one that I bought at that store.
> But they wouldn't unbrick the one I couldn't prove was mine.
> 
> Now let's look at this from an adult viewpoint since apparently Alan Baker
> has been claiming I stole the iPad that I brought to Apple to unbrick.
> 
> Only Alan Baker would say that someone would do that, because if it was
> stolen, there's been plenty of time for Apple to be informed of that.
> 
> Since they have my ID, they could call the cops at any time should it be
> reported stolen in the future. The point is Alan Baker is a moron.
> 
> What he's doing is making kindergarten excuses for Apple's behavior.
> But I do enjoy your wit as I have Alan Baker & Jughead in my killfile.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141259

From	Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com>
Date	2024-05-18 03:28 +0000
Message-ID	<laqlj1FtmjkU4@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#141246

On 2024-05-18, Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
> Hank Rogers wrote on Fri, 17 May 2024 19:22:44 -0500 :
>
>>> They wanted his ID so that if it turned OUT that the device was stolen, 
>>> they could point the police in the right direction.
>> 
>> So, it turned out he was innocent?
>> 
>> Hard to believe, since he hates apple with all his soul.
>
> Whoa. I do not hate Apple. 

🤡

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141262

From	Andrew <andrew@spam.net>
Date	2024-05-18 11:39 +0000
Message-ID	<v2a427$ivc$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>
In reply to	#141259

Jolly Roger wrote on 18 May 2024 03:28:33 GMT :

>> Whoa. I do not hate Apple. 
> 
> :)

I post on the adult consumer operating system newsgroups the same types of
things on the child-like Apple operating system newsgroups, Jolly Roger.

Just because I post the truth about Microsoft, Canonical & Google, nobody
there says I hate those companies. I don't like them. I don't hate them.

   *I just post the truth.*

It's only on the child-like Apple newsgroups that the truth about the
mothership is considered blashphemy, where, paraphrasing Hank's astute
wisdom, you worship Apple to the point that you religious zealots scream 

   "*Kill the Infidels!*".

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141274

From	Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com>
Date	2024-05-18 16:47 +0000
Message-ID	<las4cvF67roU2@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#141262

On 2024-05-18, Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
> Jolly Roger wrote on 18 May 2024 03:28:33 GMT :
>
>>> Whoa. I do not hate Apple. 
>> 
>> :)
>
> child-like Apple operating system 
> child-like Apple newsgroups
> blashphemy
> worship Apple
> religious zealots
> Kill the Infidels!

You're a hateful little dork, Arlen.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141277

From	Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com>
Date	2024-05-18 09:57 -0700
Message-ID	<v2amm2$2rtp2$6@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#141274

On 2024-05-18 09:47, Jolly Roger wrote:
> On 2024-05-18, Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
>> Jolly Roger wrote on 18 May 2024 03:28:33 GMT :
>>
>>>> Whoa. I do not hate Apple.
>>>
>>> :)
>>
>> child-like Apple operating system
>> child-like Apple newsgroups
>> blashphemy
>> worship Apple
>> religious zealots
>> Kill the Infidels!
> 
> You're a hateful little dork, Arlen.
> 

Hateful is precisely the right word.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141285

From	Hank Rogers <Hank@nospam.invalid>
Date	2024-05-18 17:55 -0500
Message-ID	<v2bblr$30gae$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#141262

Andrew wrote:
> Jolly Roger wrote on 18 May 2024 03:28:33 GMT :
> 
>>> Whoa. I do not hate Apple.
>>
>> :)
> 
> I post on the adult consumer operating system newsgroups the same types of
> things on the child-like Apple operating system newsgroups, Jolly Roger.
> 
> Just because I post the truth about Microsoft, Canonical & Google, nobody
> there says I hate those companies. I don't like them. I don't hate them.
> 
>     *I just post the truth.*
> 
> It's only on the child-like Apple newsgroups that the truth about the
> mothership is considered blashphemy, where, paraphrasing Hank's astute
> wisdom, you worship Apple to the point that you religious zealots scream
> 
>     "*Kill the Infidels!*".
> 

I apologize for my rash outburst. I was wrong.

I do need to remember that this group is purely for discussing apple's 
stock market standing, their business stature, profits and losses, customer 
service, warranty performance, compatibility with other devices, lawsuits, 
crimes, fines, regulations, political matters, etc. etc. ... Over the 
complete world, and especially in europe, which is the most important region.

It is NOT for discussion of any technical details, and most definitely NOT 
for helping anyone with problems they may have with using their device. 
These people should be summarily insulted and dismissed. These assholes can 
simply go to any apple store to get instant expert help from certified 
apple geniuses who know everything. This is NOT the place to help anyone 
with apple products.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141234

From	Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com>
Date	2024-05-17 23:41 +0000
Message-ID	<laq899FrutkU7@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#141212

On 2024-05-17, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
> Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
>> Frank Slootweg wrote on 17 May 2024 18:16:16 GMT :
>> 
>> >> The two questions which need to be known to begin to understand the process
>> >> well enough to solve it are those which trace the path of the video clip.
>> > 
>> >   You can't "solve" it, without the *sender* using a *different* method
>> > to get the video to you, i.e. as has been mentioned, using some 'cloud'
>> > or other file transfer service.
>> 
>> I'm not a bad problem solver, so I might find a workaround which doesn't
>> require the IPhone sender to change their habits just for me to receive a
>> decent video from them. 
>
>   I'm quite sure you can't "solve" the problem, because it requires the
> *sender*'s device (iPhone) to do things differently and that is beyond
> *your* control (and BTW also beyond his).
>
>   But by all means, eat your heart out and experiment away.
>
> [...]
>
>> Lastly, when Apple figures out how to add RCS, that might also work then
>> to receive videos from iPhone users that are not crappy quality (but I 
>> don't have much faith in that - yet - we'll have to just wait & see).
>
>   As has been mentioned (by Carlos and me), RCS is a theoretical
> solution, but whether or not Apple will add RCS functionality to iOS is
> beyond your control, so *you* won't be "solve"-ing anything.

Apple announced long ago they would be adding RCS support, and Arlen
knows this because he trolled about RCS and was informed of that right
here in this newsgroup. Pepperidge Farm remembers. 😉

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141250

From	Andrew <andrew@spam.net>
Date	2024-05-18 01:12 +0000
Message-ID	<v28v9p$18o8$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>
In reply to	#141234

Jolly Roger wrote on 17 May 2024 23:41:29 GMT :

> Apple announced long ago they would be adding RCS support

It's no longer shocking you misread what he meant, because Apple "claiming"
that they will "support RCS" is no different than Ashley Madison claiming
that they will scrub your identifying data if you paid them to do it.

The proof of that is Apple claimed to allow alternative stores, and while
it's currently in court, apparently only about 38 apps out of almost fifty
thousand are available - where the rest said Apple's terms were such that
it was financially impossible to make money the way Apple structured it.

Bear in mind how brilliant Apple is in the "big lie" (remember they told
you that you had to buy a new battery because all batteries die after one
year when nobody believed that and in the end it cost Apple about a billion
dollars in legal fees and settlement terms for their brazen lies).

The point is nobody thinks Apple is capable of fully implementing RCS.
The existential evidence is abundant.

So for now, it's just words - much like Ashley Madison's words were.
 *Inside the rise and fall of Ashley Madison: �People literally*
 *lost their lives� due to Ashley Madison's lies*
 <https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/article/2024/may/14/ashley-madison-netflix-documentary>

Apple & Ashley Madison use the same game plan.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141260

From	Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com>
Date	2024-05-18 03:30 +0000
Message-ID	<laqlmjFtmjkU5@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#141250

On 2024-05-18, Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
> Jolly Roger wrote on 17 May 2024 23:41:29 GMT :
>
>> Apple announced long ago they would be adding RCS support
>
> It's no longer shocking you misread what he meant, because Apple
> "claiming" that they will "support RCS" is no different than Ashley
> Madison claiming that they will scrub your identifying data if you
> paid them to do it.

You're going to look really dumb once they announce support for it later
this year as they promised.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141231

From	Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com>
Date	2024-05-17 23:20 +0000
Message-ID	<laq71mFrutkU3@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#141207

On 2024-05-17, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
> Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
> [...]
>
>> The two questions which need to be known to begin to understand the
>> process well enough to solve it are those which trace the path of the
>> video clip.
>
>   You can't "solve" it, without the *sender* using a *different*
>   method to get the video to you, i.e. as has been mentioned, using
>   some 'cloud' or other file transfer service.
>
>> 1. Is the video split up on the iPhone, Apple servers or carrier
>> servers?
>
>   With "split up", you mean the communication path is split, the video
>   isn't split.
>
>   Answer: (As Carlos indicated,) On the iPhone. Your mobile number is
>   in the sender's (i.e. iPhone) contacts. The Messages app on the
>   iPhone sees it's a mobile phone number, so it decides to send a MMS
>   message. As Carlos mentioned, the decision must be taken on the
>   iPhone, because the cost of the MMS message (even if it comes out of
>   a bundle) must be charged to the iPhone user's mobile provider

Close, but still incorrect. It's not about whether it's a phone number
or not. It's about whether the recipient is an iMessage user. iMessage
users can and do register their phone numbers as iMessage recipient
numbers, and they can also register email addresses.

>> 2. Is the video downsized on the iPhone, Apple servers or carrier servers?
>
>   As we don't use MMS in the real world, 

MMS has only been in use on mobile phones since 2002, and is still in
use by people all over the world today, though certainly not as much as
previous years, especially since more robust and feature-packed internet
messaging apps gained popularity - but make no mistake, it is still used
in the real world (and is what we are discussing in this very thread).

> I don't know where the
> (resolution) shrinking of the video is done, but I assume it's done on
> the iPhone. Doing it on other servers would mean a huge waste of -
> possibly very costly - mobile data.

No. The video is sent full size by the iPhone and the compression
happens on the receiving cellular network.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141235

From	Tyrone <none@none.none>
Date	2024-05-17 23:41 +0000
Message-ID	<FOidnYRIWPyodtr7nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@supernews.com>
In reply to	#141231

On May 17, 2024 at 7:20:23 PM EDT, "Jolly Roger" <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

>> I don't know where the
>> (resolution) shrinking of the video is done, but I assume it's done on
>> the iPhone. Doing it on other servers would mean a huge waste of -
>> possibly very costly - mobile data.
> 
> No. The video is sent full size by the iPhone and the compression
> happens on the receiving cellular network.

What seems to be missing in this discussion is that this happens in both
directions. From Android to iPhone also. Is the "shrinking" then done on the
Android phone? 

No.  The compression happens over the cell network. 

So why is no one asking "Why are Android videos clear when sent to Android
phones but blurry when sent to iPhones?"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141236

From	Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com>
Date	2024-05-17 16:55 -0700
Message-ID	<v28qpr$2e82s$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#141235

On 2024-05-17 16:41, Tyrone wrote:
> On May 17, 2024 at 7:20:23 PM EDT, "Jolly Roger" <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> 
>>> I don't know where the
>>> (resolution) shrinking of the video is done, but I assume it's done on
>>> the iPhone. Doing it on other servers would mean a huge waste of -
>>> possibly very costly - mobile data.
>>
>> No. The video is sent full size by the iPhone and the compression
>> happens on the receiving cellular network.
> 
> What seems to be missing in this discussion is that this happens in both
> directions. From Android to iPhone also. Is the "shrinking" then done on the
> Android phone?
> 
> No.  The compression happens over the cell network.
> 
> So why is no one asking "Why are Android videos clear when sent to Android
> phones but blurry when sent to iPhones?"

Indeed.

I believe I asked that question.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141241

From	Hank Rogers <Hank@nospam.invalid>
Date	2024-05-17 19:38 -0500
Message-ID	<v28tau$2elqv$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#141236

Alan wrote:
> On 2024-05-17 16:41, Tyrone wrote:
>> On May 17, 2024 at 7:20:23â€¯PM EDT, "Jolly Roger" <jollyroger@pobox.com> 
>> wrote:
>>
>>>> I don't know where the
>>>> (resolution) shrinking of the video is done, but I assume it's done on
>>>> the iPhone. Doing it on other servers would mean a huge waste of -
>>>> possibly very costly - mobile data.
>>>
>>> No. The video is sent full size by the iPhone and the compression
>>> happens on the receiving cellular network.
>>
>> What seems to be missing in this discussion is that this happens in both
>> directions. From Android to iPhone also. Is the "shrinking" then done on the
>> Android phone?
>>
>> No.  The compression happens over the cell network.
>>
>> So why is no one asking "Why are Android videos clear when sent to Android
>> phones but blurry when sent to iPhones?"
> 
> Indeed.
> 
> I believe I asked that question.

Yes these trolls are just attacking apple, as usual.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 Next page →

csiph-web

Why are iPhone videos clear when sent to iPhones but blurry when sent to Android?

Contents

#141217

#141225

#141228

#141238

#141245

#141246

#141252

#141253 — How stupid is Arlen? (was Re: Why are iPhone videos clear when sent to iPhones but blurry when sent to Android?

#141259

#141262

#141274

#141277

#141285

#141234

#141250

#141260

#141231

#141235

#141236

#141241