Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.mobile.android > #37074 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "TomR" <TomR@TomRhjghgl.ncm> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-12-31 13:01 -0500 |
| Last post | 2017-01-04 15:14 -0500 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 145 — 19 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.mobile.android
Free texting and calling via WiFi? "TomR" <TomR@TomRhjghgl.ncm> - 2016-12-31 13:01 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-12-31 13:08 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? "TomR" <TomR@TomRhjghgl.ncm> - 2016-12-31 13:27 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-12-31 13:47 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> - 2016-12-31 12:15 -0700
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> - 2016-12-31 17:01 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Yanis Bernard <YanisBernards_jonque@orange.fr> - 2017-01-01 00:54 +0100
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> - 2016-12-31 22:03 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-12-31 20:58 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? ANTant@zimage.com (Ant) - 2016-12-31 21:02 -0600
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2017-01-01 00:07 -0600
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? ANTant@zimage.com (Ant) - 2017-01-01 20:21 -0600
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2017-01-01 20:57 -0600
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? M.L. <me@privacy.invalid> - 2017-01-03 03:01 -0600
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? M.L. <me@privacy.invalid> - 2017-01-03 03:08 -0600
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2017-01-03 04:37 -0600
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? M.L. <me@privacy.invalid> - 2017-01-03 13:10 -0600
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2017-01-03 14:02 -0600
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? M.L. <me@privacy.invalid> - 2017-01-03 14:42 -0600
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> - 2017-01-04 05:02 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? "TomR" <TomR@TomRhjghgl.ncm> - 2016-12-31 14:21 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Yanis Bernard <YanisBernards_jonque@orange.fr> - 2016-12-31 19:57 +0100
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? "TomR" <TomR@TomRhjghgl.ncm> - 2016-12-31 14:20 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Yanis Bernard <YanisBernards_jonque@orange.fr> - 2016-12-31 23:29 +0100
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> - 2016-12-31 18:02 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? mike <ham789@netzero.net> - 2016-12-31 15:49 -0800
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Yanis Bernard <YanisBernards_jonque@orange.fr> - 2017-01-01 01:00 +0100
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> - 2016-12-31 20:26 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Yanis Bernard <YanisBernards_jonque@orange.fr> - 2017-01-01 00:54 +0100
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2017-01-01 14:30 +0000
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Yanis Bernard <YanisBernards_jonque@orange.fr> - 2017-01-01 18:50 +0100
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> - 2017-01-01 19:47 +0000
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2017-01-01 20:20 +0000
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> - 2017-01-01 20:59 +0000
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2017-01-01 21:34 +0000
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? M.L. <me@privacy.invalid> - 2017-01-03 03:18 -0600
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Yanis Bernard <YanisBernards_jonque@orange.fr> - 2017-01-01 18:51 +0100
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2017-01-01 11:56 -0800
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> - 2017-01-02 03:06 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2017-01-01 14:14 +0000
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Yanis Bernard <YanisBernards_jonque@orange.fr> - 2017-01-01 18:49 +0100
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2017-01-01 20:43 +0000
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> - 2017-01-02 03:23 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2017-01-02 10:47 -0800
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> - 2017-01-02 14:23 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2017-01-02 12:02 -0800
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> - 2017-01-02 16:15 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Yanis Bernard <YanisBernards_jonque@orange.fr> - 2017-01-03 02:48 +0100
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> - 2017-01-04 03:04 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Yanis Bernard <YanisBernards_jonque@orange.fr> - 2017-01-03 02:48 +0100
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> - 2017-01-03 16:00 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Yanis Bernard <YanisBernards_jonque@orange.fr> - 2017-01-04 06:05 +0100
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-01-04 01:51 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> - 2017-01-05 01:54 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-01-05 09:49 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> - 2017-01-06 00:06 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-01-06 00:23 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> - 2017-01-06 19:48 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-01-06 20:51 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> - 2017-01-07 13:36 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-01-07 13:47 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> - 2017-01-07 13:37 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-01-07 13:47 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2017-01-07 20:50 +0000
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> - 2017-01-07 13:49 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-01-07 14:05 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2017-01-07 20:37 +0000
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-01-07 15:40 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2017-01-07 21:40 +0000
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-01-07 18:23 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2017-01-08 17:03 +0000
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Dave Higton <dave@davehigton.me.uk> - 2017-01-07 23:23 +0000
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-01-07 18:45 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> - 2017-01-08 00:59 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-01-08 22:32 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Dave Higton <dave@davehigton.me.uk> - 2017-01-09 15:23 +0000
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-01-09 10:30 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> - 2017-01-04 04:33 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Yanis Bernard <YanisBernards_jonque@orange.fr> - 2017-01-03 02:48 +0100
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2017-01-02 18:14 -0800
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> - 2017-01-03 20:55 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-01-03 21:00 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Yanis Bernard <YanisBernards_jonque@orange.fr> - 2017-01-03 02:48 +0100
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2017-01-02 18:05 -0800
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-01-03 08:41 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> - 2017-01-04 06:01 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> - 2017-01-03 21:04 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> - 2017-01-03 20:57 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-01-03 21:00 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> - 2017-01-04 04:19 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-01-04 10:03 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> - 2017-01-03 21:09 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-01-03 21:18 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> - 2017-01-04 04:26 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-01-04 10:03 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2017-01-03 05:54 +0100
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> - 2017-01-03 20:48 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2017-01-03 05:48 +0100
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> - 2017-01-04 04:30 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2017-01-07 22:06 +0100
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Ken1943 <kenw@no295no.net> - 2016-12-31 11:27 -0700
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Yanis Bernard <YanisBernards_jonque@orange.fr> - 2016-12-31 19:57 +0100
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? "TomR" <TomR@TomRhjghgl.ncm> - 2016-12-31 14:36 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Yanis Bernard <YanisBernards_jonque@orange.fr> - 2016-12-31 23:29 +0100
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> - 2016-12-31 18:12 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Yanis Bernard <YanisBernards_jonque@orange.fr> - 2017-01-01 00:54 +0100
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? "TomR" <TomR@TomRhjghgl.ncm> - 2017-01-03 16:09 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> - 2016-12-31 19:38 +0100
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2016-12-31 12:37 -0800
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Yanis Bernard <YanisBernards_jonque@orange.fr> - 2016-12-31 23:29 +0100
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-12-31 20:58 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> - 2016-12-31 14:02 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? "TomR" <TomR@TomRhjghgl.ncm> - 2016-12-31 14:53 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? M.L. <me@privacy.invalid> - 2017-01-03 03:46 -0600
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Yanis Bernard <YanisBernards_jonque@orange.fr> - 2016-12-31 23:29 +0100
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> - 2016-12-31 18:25 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Yanis Bernard <YanisBernards_jonque@orange.fr> - 2017-01-01 00:54 +0100
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> - 2016-12-31 22:20 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Yanis Bernard <YanisBernards_jonque@orange.fr> - 2017-01-01 12:12 +0100
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> - 2017-01-02 02:34 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> - 2016-12-31 14:08 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? M.L. <me@privacy.invalid> - 2017-01-03 04:17 -0600
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> - 2017-01-03 08:30 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? M.L. <me@privacy.invalid> - 2017-01-03 13:23 -0600
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> - 2017-01-03 18:18 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? M.L. <me@privacy.invalid> - 2017-01-03 17:58 -0600
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> - 2017-01-04 03:59 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2017-01-04 20:28 -0800
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-01-04 23:29 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> - 2017-01-03 21:56 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? "(PeteCresswell)" <x@y.Invalid> - 2016-12-31 16:11 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Yanis Bernard <YanisBernards_jonque@orange.fr> - 2016-12-31 23:29 +0100
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2016-12-31 19:58 -0800
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> - 2017-01-02 02:35 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2017-01-02 10:35 -0800
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> - 2017-01-02 12:28 -0700
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2017-01-02 12:05 -0800
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> - 2017-01-02 16:16 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? Piet <www.godfatherof.nl/@opt-in.invalid> - 2017-01-03 11:24 +0100
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2016-12-31 17:02 -0600
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? M.L. <me@privacy.invalid> - 2017-01-03 03:37 -0600
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2017-01-03 13:27 -0600
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? "TomR" <TomR@TomRhjghgl.ncm> - 2017-01-03 16:21 -0500
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2017-01-03 19:04 -0600
Re: Free texting and calling via WiFi? "TomR" <TomR@TomRhjghgl.ncm> - 2017-01-04 15:14 -0500
Page 4 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 Next page →
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-07 13:47 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <070120171347229752%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #37511 |
In article <lxy1lkype6zx$.e89oux7jiyeo$.dlg@40tude.net>, tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> wrote: > > > the third problem is having this thing sticking out of the bottom or > > side of the tablet. who wants that? > > A non-problem if I use a M/F USB extension cable. Cheers, -- tlvp that's even worse.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-07 13:37 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <9hkqr1e7bbz1.pk12c3tu3ovz.dlg@40tude.net> |
| In reply to | #37492 |
On Fri, 06 Jan 2017 20:51:57 -0500, nospam wrote: > the second problem is getting the tablet to use that > usb data stick for connectivity. what drivers were you planning on > installing to accomplish that? "Plug'n'play", nospam, "plug'n'play." Cheers, -- tlvp -- Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-07 13:47 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <070120171347229782%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #37512 |
In article <9hkqr1e7bbz1.pk12c3tu3ovz.dlg@40tude.net>, tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> wrote: > > > the second problem is getting the tablet to use that > > usb data stick for connectivity. what drivers were you planning on > > installing to accomplish that? > > "Plug'n'play", nospam, "plug'n'play." Cheers, -- tlvp whoosh.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-07 20:50 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <edd2k5FtfdkU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #37512 |
tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> wrote: > On Fri, 06 Jan 2017 20:51:57 -0500, nospam wrote: > > > the second problem is getting the tablet to use that > > usb data stick for connectivity. what drivers were you planning on > > installing to accomplish that? > > "Plug'n'play", nospam, "plug'n'play." Cheers, -- tlvp For "Plug'n'play" to work, a 'computer'/OS needs to have the drivers for the add-on device or/and the ability to add drivers. Android can not do the latter and has only a very limited set of the former (built-in drivers for add-on devices). Most Android devices can handle a USB-keyboard and a USB-mouse. Android devices which have USB-OTG (On The Go) support, can handle *some* (but not all) USB mass-storage devices, mainly USB memory-sticks and USB (memory-) card-readers. AFAIK, that's it, i.e. a *very* limited set of devices, which does NOT include a USB mobile-data modem.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-07 13:49 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <7hfcpqn5nc8w.s9yfy7ootopp$.dlg@40tude.net> |
| In reply to | #37492 |
On Fri, 06 Jan 2017 20:51:57 -0500, nospam wrote: > the first problem is fooling t-mobile into thinking that a usb data > stick is actually a tablet. despite your claims, it is not. the imei > indicates what type of device it is, so t-mobile just needs to look up > the data stick's imei and will see that it's a data stick and not a > tablet Why should they care whether it's an actual tablet or a USB data stick being used on a tablet? After all, as you write, > the whole point of the 200mb free plan is a goodwill gesture to get new > customers, with the hope that some of them upgrade to a paid tablet > plan with higher data caps ... . I'd be as good an upgrade candidate as someone with a radio-equipped tablet to start with. But, what the heck, you can always "prove" me wrong ... . Cheers, -- tlvp -- Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-07 14:05 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <070120171405033432%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #37515 |
In article <7hfcpqn5nc8w.s9yfy7ootopp$.dlg@40tude.net>, tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> wrote: > > > the first problem is fooling t-mobile into thinking that a usb data > > stick is actually a tablet. despite your claims, it is not. the imei > > indicates what type of device it is, so t-mobile just needs to look up > > the data stick's imei and will see that it's a data stick and not a > > tablet > > Why should they care whether it's an actual tablet or a USB data stick > being used on a tablet? After all, as you write, because, as i explained in the part you snipped, is if they allowed usb sticks, people would abuse it and use it on non-tablets, and that's assuming people can resolve the other issues (not a good assumption). the plan is for tablets. simple as that. tablets come with cellular radios. if the imei lookup is of a tablet, the plan is available. if not, it isn't. simple and effective. if you bought a tablet without a cellular radio and want to use cellular, then you bought wrong product. return it for a tablet with built-in cellular and stop fucking around with clumsy convoluted solutions that won't work. > > the whole point of the 200mb free plan is a goodwill gesture to get new > > customers, with the hope that some of them upgrade to a paid tablet > > plan with higher data caps ... . > > I'd be as good an upgrade candidate as someone with a radio-equipped tablet > to start with. But, what the heck, you can always "prove" me wrong ... . not only can i do that but so can everyone else, because you are wrong.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-07 20:37 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <edd1t1Ft9ogU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #37516 |
nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote: > In article <7hfcpqn5nc8w.s9yfy7ootopp$.dlg@40tude.net>, tlvp > <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> wrote: > > > > the first problem is fooling t-mobile into thinking that a usb data > > > stick is actually a tablet. despite your claims, it is not. the imei > > > indicates what type of device it is, so t-mobile just needs to look up > > > the data stick's imei and will see that it's a data stick and not a > > > tablet > > > > Why should they care whether it's an actual tablet or a USB data stick > > being used on a tablet? After all, as you write, > > because, as i explained in the part you snipped, is if they allowed usb > sticks, people would abuse it and use it on non-tablets, and that's > assuming people can resolve the other issues (not a good assumption). > > the plan is for tablets. simple as that. tablets come with cellular > radios. if the imei lookup is of a tablet, the plan is available. if > not, it isn't. simple and effective. You describe the way *that* the plan is restricted to tablets, but don't give a good reason *why* the plan is restricted that way. You give a possible reason of stimulating customers to get higher plans on tablets. But why not stimulate getting higher plans on other type of devices (i.e. laptops, mobile Wi-Fi access points, etc)? I.e. it is the way it is, nothing more, nothing less. T-Mobile decided it this way. That may make sense to them, but doesn't neccessarily make sense to 'us'. [...]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-07 15:40 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <070120171540045503%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #37527 |
In article <edd1t1Ft9ogU1@mid.individual.net>, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote: > > > > the first problem is fooling t-mobile into thinking that a usb data > > > > stick is actually a tablet. despite your claims, it is not. the imei > > > > indicates what type of device it is, so t-mobile just needs to look up > > > > the data stick's imei and will see that it's a data stick and not a > > > > tablet > > > > > > Why should they care whether it's an actual tablet or a USB data stick > > > being used on a tablet? After all, as you write, > > > > because, as i explained in the part you snipped, is if they allowed usb > > sticks, people would abuse it and use it on non-tablets, and that's > > assuming people can resolve the other issues (not a good assumption). > > > > the plan is for tablets. simple as that. tablets come with cellular > > radios. if the imei lookup is of a tablet, the plan is available. if > > not, it isn't. simple and effective. > > You describe the way *that* the plan is restricted to tablets, but don't > give a good reason *why* the plan is restricted that way. i did give a good reason. more than one, in fact. > You give a possible reason of stimulating customers to get higher > plans on tablets. But why not stimulate getting higher plans on other > type of devices (i.e. laptops, mobile Wi-Fi access points, etc)? it does that. > I.e. it is the way it is, nothing more, nothing less. T-Mobile decided > it this way. That may make sense to them, but doesn't neccessarily make > sense to 'us'. it doesn't need to make sense to you personally. very little does, and this is no exception. however, it makes a lot of sense to other people.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-07 21:40 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <edd5hjFu6okU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #37528 |
nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote: > In article <edd1t1Ft9ogU1@mid.individual.net>, Frank Slootweg > <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote: > > > > > > the first problem is fooling t-mobile into thinking that a usb data > > > > > stick is actually a tablet. despite your claims, it is not. the imei > > > > > indicates what type of device it is, so t-mobile just needs to look up > > > > > the data stick's imei and will see that it's a data stick and not a > > > > > tablet > > > > > > > > Why should they care whether it's an actual tablet or a USB data stick > > > > being used on a tablet? After all, as you write, > > > > > > because, as i explained in the part you snipped, is if they allowed usb > > > sticks, people would abuse it and use it on non-tablets, and that's > > > assuming people can resolve the other issues (not a good assumption). > > > > > > the plan is for tablets. simple as that. tablets come with cellular > > > radios. if the imei lookup is of a tablet, the plan is available. if > > > not, it isn't. simple and effective. > > > > You describe the way *that* the plan is restricted to tablets, but don't > > give a good reason *why* the plan is restricted that way. > > i did give a good reason. more than one, in fact. It's a good reason in *your* *opinion*, nothing more, nothing less. > > You give a possible reason of stimulating customers to get higher > > plans on tablets. But why not stimulate getting higher plans on other > > type of devices (i.e. laptops, mobile Wi-Fi access points, etc)? > > it does that. In *your* *opnion*. > > I.e. it is the way it is, nothing more, nothing less. T-Mobile decided > > it this way. That may make sense to them, but doesn't neccessarily make > > sense to 'us'. > > it doesn't need to make sense to you personally. very little does, and > this is no exception. Exactly *which* part of "'us'" didn't you understand? > however, it makes a lot of sense to other people. Not to anyone in this group, it does. At least none have said so and some have said the opposite. So let's rephrase that: It makes sense to *you*, not neccessarily anybody else. Bottom line: Just another case of nospam's opinion presented as fact.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-07 18:23 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <070120171823102672%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #37532 |
In article <edd5hjFu6okU1@mid.individual.net>, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote: > > > however, it makes a lot of sense to other people. > > Not to anyone in this group, it does. At least none have said so and > some have said the opposite. you have no way to know what everyone reading this group thinks (not everyone posts). the only person i can think of who said the opposite is someone who has less of a clue than you do. > So let's rephrase that: It makes sense to *you*, not neccessarily > anybody else. let's rephrase it: anyone with an even the slightest bit of intelligence can see why t-mobile offers a free 200mb data plan that only works on tablets. > Bottom line: Just another case of nospam's opinion presented as fact. bottom line, just another case of frank's opinion presented as fact. nothing you've said in this thread or in others disproves what i wrote.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-08 17:03 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <edf9n7FfcmiU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #37539 |
nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote: > In article <edd5hjFu6okU1@mid.individual.net>, Frank Slootweg > <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote: > > > > however, it makes a lot of sense to other people. > > > > Not to anyone in this group, it does. At least none have said so and > > some have said the opposite. > > you have no way to know what everyone reading this group thinks (not > everyone posts). And likewise, you have no way of knowing that "it makes a lot of sense to other people". *Both* of us can only work with the feedback we get. [...]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dave Higton <dave@davehigton.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-07 23:23 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <5b70ecfa55.DaveMeUK@my.inbox.com> |
| In reply to | #37492 |
In message <060120172051570614%nospam@nospam.invalid>
nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <7t22t1skjb5r.1ucoo7z92rgrj.dlg@40tude.net>, tlvp
> <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > > So there's no hope to use it with a USB- or PCMCIA-based cellular
> > > > > > data modem? That would explain why I've never managed to get one
> > > > > > activated there. (Drat!) Cheers, -- tlvp
> > > > >
> > > > > what part of 'only applies to tablets' is not clear?
> > > >
> > > > It's exactly a tablet I'd be using that USB-based cellular data modem
> > > > on.
> > >
> > > what in the hell for? use the cell radio in the tablet.
> >
> > You mean, "the cell radio *that was never incorporated* in the tablet"?
>
> why did you buy a tablet that doesn't have a cellular radio if you plan to
> use cellular data?
I boght a tablet without a cellular radio because I expect to use it
mostly at home. It was cheaper to buy without cellular, and it's
cheaper to run because it doesn't need a second SIM card and account.
On the rare occasions that I have used it away from home, I turned on
the wifi AP of my phone, whose account allows me to tether and to run
a hotspot.
Dave
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-07 18:45 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <070120171845594830%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #37540 |
In article <5b70ecfa55.DaveMeUK@my.inbox.com>, Dave Higton <dave@davehigton.me.uk> wrote: > > > > > It's exactly a tablet I'd be using that USB-based cellular data modem > > > > > on. > > > > > > > > what in the hell for? use the cell radio in the tablet. > > > > > > You mean, "the cell radio *that was never incorporated* in the tablet"? > > > > why did you buy a tablet that doesn't have a cellular radio if you plan to > > use cellular data? > > I boght a tablet without a cellular radio because I expect to use it > mostly at home. It was cheaper to buy without cellular, and it's > cheaper to run because it doesn't need a second SIM card and account. a second sim card is cheap (or free) and no account is needed with a pay as you go plan. simply activate/deactivate when needed. another option is use t-mobile's free plan, which is well suited for occasional use. > On the rare occasions that I have used it away from home, I turned on > the wifi AP of my phone, whose account allows me to tether and to run > a hotspot. that also works, but not all cellular plans include tethering.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-08 00:59 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nn2zzmld3hi5$.kxzuixaygjol$.dlg@40tude.net> |
| In reply to | #37541 |
On Sat, 07 Jan 2017 18:45:59 -0500, nospam wrote: >> I boght a tablet without a cellular radio because I expect to use it >> mostly at home. It was cheaper to buy without cellular, and it's >> cheaper to run because it doesn't need a second SIM card and account. > > a second sim card is cheap (or free) and no account is needed with a > pay as you go plan. simply activate/deactivate when needed. > > another option is use t-mobile's free plan, which is well suited for > occasional use. You must have overlooked Dave's words that his tablet is without cellular radio (and his explanation why). Why else do you continue to insist that "a second sim card", or "t-mobile's free plan", are appropriate to use here? Cheers, -- tlvp -- Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-08 22:32 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <080120172232003105%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #37547 |
In article <nn2zzmld3hi5$.kxzuixaygjol$.dlg@40tude.net>, tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> wrote: > On Sat, 07 Jan 2017 18:45:59 -0500, nospam wrote: > > >> I boght a tablet without a cellular radio because I expect to use it > >> mostly at home. It was cheaper to buy without cellular, and it's > >> cheaper to run because it doesn't need a second SIM card and account. > > > > a second sim card is cheap (or free) and no account is needed with a > > pay as you go plan. simply activate/deactivate when needed. > > > > another option is use t-mobile's free plan, which is well suited for > > occasional use. > > You must have overlooked Dave's words that his tablet is without cellular > radio (and his explanation why). Why else do you continue to insist that "a > second sim card", or "t-mobile's free plan", are appropriate to use here? i didn't at all. read what i wrote, without snipping to alter context.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dave Higton <dave@davehigton.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-09 15:23 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <f836c8fb55.DaveMeUK@my.inbox.com> |
| In reply to | #37541 |
In message <070120171845594830%nospam@nospam.invalid>
nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <5b70ecfa55.DaveMeUK@my.inbox.com>, Dave Higton
> <dave@davehigton.me.uk> wrote:
>
> > > > > > It's exactly a tablet I'd be using that USB-based cellular data
> > > > > > modem on.
> > > > >
> > > > > what in the hell for? use the cell radio in the tablet.
> > > >
> > > > You mean, "the cell radio *that was never incorporated* in the
> > > > tablet"?
> > >
> > > why did you buy a tablet that doesn't have a cellular radio if you plan
> > > to use cellular data?
> >
> > I boght a tablet without a cellular radio because I expect to use it
> > mostly at home. It was cheaper to buy without cellular, and it's cheaper
> > to run because it doesn't need a second SIM card and account.
>
> a second sim card is cheap (or free) and no account is needed with a pay as
> you go plan. simply activate/deactivate when needed.
Here, a PAYG plan is like a contract but less versatile and more
expensive. If I needed PAYG data, I'd have to pay usually GBP10
for 30 days of data, which expire and cannot be deactivated or saved.
So that would be an expensive option for me.
> another option is use t-mobile's free plan, which is well suited for
> occasional use.
Not available here.
> > On the rare occasions that I have used it away from home, I turned on the
> > wifi AP of my phone, whose account allows me to tether and to run a
> > hotspot.
>
> that also works, but not all cellular plans include tethering.
But mine does.
So your idea that tablets must include a cellular radio simply doesn't
suit everyone. It would be more expensive for me and give me no
benefit whatsoever.
Dave
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-09 10:30 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <090120171030450322%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #37592 |
In article <f836c8fb55.DaveMeUK@my.inbox.com>, Dave Higton <dave@davehigton.me.uk> wrote: > > > > On the rare occasions that I have used it away from home, I turned on the > > > wifi AP of my phone, whose account allows me to tether and to run a > > > hotspot. > > > > that also works, but not all cellular plans include tethering. > > But mine does. that's wonderful, but not everyone has a tethering-capable plan and it generally costs extra if they do. > So your idea that tablets must include a cellular radio simply doesn't > suit everyone. It would be more expensive for me and give me no > benefit whatsoever. i didn't say it suits everyone. that's why companies make both. however, with a wifi-only tablet, you don't have the benefit of always-on internet and you have to have a phone with you. there are always tradeoffs.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-04 04:33 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <m6gp6c1nqmq1ng2uujhc5lg6912k5avij1@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #37270 |
In comp.mobile.android, on Wed, 4 Jan 2017 06:05:10 +0100, Yanis Bernard <YanisBernards_jonque@orange.fr> wrote: >micky said: > >> No, for a phone. I don't have a tablet. > >Then I just wish to be clear that the free 200MB/month for life that I was >talking about doesn't apply to a phone as far as I know. > >It only applies to tablets as far as I know. Right. And that's what you said in the first place, though when I saw this other "offer" I forgot what you said. But you've probably read my other posts where I say I'm trying to find out if the other offer is just for the SIM or the SIM and free data.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Yanis Bernard <YanisBernards_jonque@orange.fr> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-03 02:48 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <o4evuk$u6o$6@news.mixmin.net> |
| In reply to | #37173 |
The Real Bev said: > All our traveling life we have tried to game the need for gasoline. One trick I use for cheap gasoline is to look for Costco near the highway. You have to have time for the long lines though but in general, it's the cheapest prices for Tier 1 gasoline.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-02 18:14 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <o4f1b0$cdk$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #37190 |
On 01/02/2017 05:48 PM, Yanis Bernard wrote:
> The Real Bev said:
>
>> All our traveling life we have tried to game the need for gasoline.
>
> One trick I use for cheap gasoline is to look for Costco near the highway.
> You have to have time for the long lines though but in general, it's the
> cheapest prices for Tier 1 gasoline.
And you get that nice 3% (or is it 4% now?) rebate.
--
Cheers, Bev
When cryptography is outlawed, only outlaws will
qwertzuio asdfghjk pyxcvbnml -- M. O'Dorney
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.mobile.android
csiph-web