Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.mobile.android > #150619 > unrolled thread

The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems

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

Contents

  The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Marion <marionf@fact.com> - 2025-09-19 14:47 +0000
    Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems AJL <noemail@none.com> - 2025-09-19 20:42 +0000
      Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-09-20 10:39 +0000
        Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-09-20 14:12 +0200
          Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems AJL <noemail@none.com> - 2025-09-20 19:26 +0000
        Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems AJL <noemail@none.com> - 2025-09-20 15:31 +0000
          Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-09-20 17:34 +0000
          Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-09-21 22:17 +0200
            Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-09-22 14:11 +0000
              Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-09-22 22:17 +0200
    Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-09-19 22:08 +0000
      Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Marion <marionf@fact.com> - 2025-09-20 06:38 +0000
        Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-09-20 22:36 +0000
          Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Marion <marionf@fact.com> - 2025-09-21 15:39 +0000
            Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-09-22 05:23 +0000
              Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Marion <marionf@fact.com> - 2025-09-22 15:58 +0000
                Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-09-22 21:40 +0000
                  Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Marion <marionf@fact.com> - 2025-09-23 00:09 +0000
                    Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 22:33 +0000
                      Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Marion <marionf@fact.com> - 2025-09-24 02:19 +0000
                        Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 06:25 +0000
                          Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Marion <marionf@fact.com> - 2025-09-24 16:55 +0000
                Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2025-09-23 10:12 +0200
                  Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Marion <marionf@fact.com> - 2025-09-23 16:12 +0000
                    Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2025-09-23 19:50 +0200
                      Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2025-09-24 08:15 +1200
                        Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems sticks <wolverine01@charter.net> - 2025-09-23 16:01 -0500
                          Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Marion <marionf@fact.com> - 2025-09-24 02:14 +0000
                            Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2025-09-24 10:28 +0200
                              Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Marion <marionf@fact.com> - 2025-09-24 16:57 +0000
                              Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> - 2025-09-25 21:29 +1000
                                Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> - 2025-09-25 07:34 -0400
                                  Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Marion <marionf@fact.com> - 2025-09-25 15:25 +0000
                                Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2025-09-25 14:26 +0200
                                  Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2025-09-25 14:37 +0200
                                    Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Marion <marionf@fact.com> - 2025-09-25 15:34 +0000
                                  Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-09-25 16:58 +0000
                                    Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2025-09-25 19:38 +0200
                                      Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-09-26 23:10 +0000
                                        Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Marion <marionf@fact.com> - 2025-09-28 19:56 +0000
                                          Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-09-29 06:49 +0000
                                            Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Marion <marionf@fact.com> - 2025-09-29 16:55 +0000
                                              Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2025-09-30 08:30 +0200
                                                Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Marion <marionf@fact.com> - 2025-09-30 17:20 +0000
                                              Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> - 2025-09-30 20:50 +1000
                                                Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Smithwicks <user@nonsenseurl.com.invalid> - 2025-09-30 12:02 -0400
                                                  Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Marion <marionf@fact.com> - 2025-09-30 17:04 +0000
                                                  Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2025-10-01 08:36 +1300
                                                    Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Hank Rogers <Hank@nospam.invalid> - 2025-09-30 19:54 -0500
                                      Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Marion <marionf@fact.com> - 2025-09-26 16:26 +0000
                                        Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-09-26 19:44 +0000
                        Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2025-09-24 10:29 +0200
                          Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Marion <marionf@fact.com> - 2025-09-24 17:06 +0000
                            Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2025-09-24 20:05 +0200
                              Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2025-09-25 09:27 +1200
                                Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Hank Rogers <Hank@nospam.invalid> - 2025-09-24 18:41 -0500
                                  Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2025-09-25 08:59 +0200
                                    Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Marion <marionf@fact.com> - 2025-09-25 16:07 +0000
                                Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2025-09-25 09:11 +0200
                                  Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Marion <marionf@fact.com> - 2025-09-25 16:31 +0000
                                    Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2025-09-25 19:26 +0200
                                      Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Marion <marionf@fact.com> - 2025-09-26 16:30 +0000
                            Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 22:09 +0000
                              Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Marion <marionf@fact.com> - 2025-09-26 16:34 +0000
                                Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-09-26 23:10 +0000
                    Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 22:33 +0000
                      Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Marion <marionf@fact.com> - 2025-09-24 02:12 +0000
                        Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 06:19 +0000
                          Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Marion <marionf@fact.com> - 2025-09-24 17:05 +0000
    Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2025-09-20 11:00 +0200
      Re: Some claims about full support for the major consumer operating systems (was: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems) Tyrone <none@none.none> - 2025-09-20 12:48 +0000
        Re: Some claims about full support for the major consumer operating systems (was: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems) "badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> - 2025-09-20 13:54 +0000
        Re: Some claims about full support for the major consumer operating systems (was: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems) "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2025-09-20 16:17 +0200
          Re: Some claims about full support for the major consumer operating systems (was: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems) Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2025-09-21 10:09 +1200
            Re: Some claims about full support for the major consumer operating systems Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-09-20 23:42 -0400
            Re: Some claims about full support for the major consumer operating systems (was: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems) "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2025-09-21 09:51 +0200
        Re: Some claims about full support for the major consumer operating systems "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-09-23 13:51 +0200
          Re: Some claims about full support for the major consumer operating systems Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2025-09-24 08:18 +1200
            Re: Some claims about full support for the major consumer operating systems Hank Rogers <Hank@nospam.invalid> - 2025-09-23 17:38 -0500
              Re: Some claims about full support for the major consumer operating systems Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-09-24 08:39 -0400
          Re: Some claims about full support for the major consumer operating systems Tyrone <none@none.none> - 2025-09-23 21:01 +0000
            Re: Some claims about full support for the major consumer operating systems "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-09-25 03:05 +0200
      Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2025-09-22 16:42 -0700
        Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2025-09-23 09:09 +0200
          Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-09-23 05:00 -0400
            Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2025-09-23 11:29 +0200
          Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2025-09-24 08:10 -0700
            Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2025-09-24 17:45 +0200
              Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2025-09-24 23:27 -0700
                Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2025-09-25 08:57 +0200
                  Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2025-09-25 09:19 -0700
                    Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2025-09-25 19:21 +0200
                Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-09-25 04:40 -0400
    Re: Hey Troll Boy Arlen you lying piece of shit... (was: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems) Tyrone <none@none.none> - 2025-09-21 05:28 +0000
      Re: Hey Troll Boy Arlen you lying piece of shit... (was: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems) Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2025-09-21 17:40 +1200
        Re: Hey Troll Boy Arlen you lying piece of shit... Tyrone <none@none.none> - 2025-09-21 13:50 +0000
      Re: Hey Troll Boy Arlen you lying piece of shit... Tyrone <none@none.none> - 2025-09-21 14:56 +0000
        Re: Hey Troll Boy Arlen you lying piece of shit... Marion <marionf@fact.com> - 2025-09-21 15:08 +0000
    Re: The truth about full support for the major consumer operating systems Marion <marionf@fact.com> - 2025-09-26 16:39 +0000

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

#150789

Marion <marionf@fact.com> wrote:
> Chris wrote:
>> Factcheck: stated claim is narrowly focused and doesn't acknowledge obvious
>> strengths in Apple support and weaknesses in Android support.
> 
> The models to compare the $1000 iPhone to aren't the $35 Androids, Chris.

Oh, Arlen! You've been doing well lately, but now regressed to your old
ways. 

We've been through this. You're comparing your "free" entry level android
with a very much non-free premium iphone. We all know you got an almost
free iphone at around the same time so you also know you should be
comparing your $35 galaxy A-32 to your $58 (iirc?) iphone 12 (mini?). 

> FACTS:
> 
>  *Apple finally confirms how long it will support iPhones* 
>  *(5 years) &  it's less than Samsung & Google (7 years)
>  <https://www.androidauthority.com/iphone-software-support-commitment-3449135/>

Alslo FACTS:

Your galaxy is no longer supported by Samsung (since February) and that
iphone - if you still had it - is still fully supported by Apple. And
likely will be for another two years. Looks like if you wanted a phone with
longterm support you returned the wrong one. 

The link above puts it really well:
"Some iPhones have received security updates six or more years after the
initial release, which is far more support than the vast majority of
Android devices receive."

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

#150804

Chris wrote:
> Marion <marionf@fact.com> wrote:
>> Chris wrote:
>>> Factcheck: stated claim is narrowly focused and doesn't acknowledge obvious
>>> strengths in Apple support and weaknesses in Android support.
>> 
>> The models to compare the $1000 iPhone to aren't the $35 Androids, Chris.
> 
> Oh, Arlen! You've been doing well lately, but now regressed to your old
> ways. 
> 
> We've been through this. You're comparing your "free" entry level android
> with a very much non-free premium iphone. We all know you got an almost
> free iphone at around the same time so you also know you should be
> comparing your $35 galaxy A-32 to your $58 (iirc?) iphone 12 (mini?). 
> 
>> FACTS:
>> 
>>  *Apple finally confirms how long it will support iPhones* 
>>  *(5 years) &  it's less than Samsung & Google (7 years)
>>  <https://www.androidauthority.com/iphone-software-support-commitment-3449135/>
> 
> Alslo FACTS:
> 
> Your galaxy is no longer supported by Samsung (since February) and that
> iphone - if you still had it - is still fully supported by Apple. And
> likely will be for another two years. Looks like if you wanted a phone with
> longterm support you returned the wrong one. 
> 
> The link above puts it really well:
> "Some iPhones have received security updates six or more years after the
> initial release, which is far more support than the vast majority of
> Android devices receive."

This is where I have to shake my head and wonder about your education.

1. When I'm explaining that a $35 Android has more functionality than 
   a $1000 iPhone, we're talking about inherent ability to run programs
  
   Android wins.

2. Then you say that your $1000 phone is supported longer than a $35 
   phone and I would agree, where I would logically compare the flagship 
   promised written full support with the iPhone promised support.

   iPhone loses.

3. The Apple trolls can't separate the two completely different concepts,
   so they claim they found a flaw in the logic because they can't 
   understand that concept of promised support for $1000 Android flagships 
   being 40% longer than promised support for the $1000 iPhone.

WTF is wrong with you Apple trolls. 
Seriously.

Have you no education at all?
No semblance of logic?

You are so desperate to counter the logic that every Android has more
functionality than any iPhone and yet the full support being 40% longer is
only for Android flagships - that you conflate the two in your head????

Who is that stupid?
Nobody, right?

Your brain can't separate that it's two completely DIFFERENT arguments!
a. The $35 phone runs more software functionality than a $1000 iPhone.
b. The promised support for competing Android flagships is 40% longer.

This is (one reason) why I assess that Apple trolls lack formal education

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

#150810

Marion, 2025-09-29 18:55:

[...]> a. The $35 phone runs more software functionality than a $1000
iPhone.

Depends on how you define "software functionality". iOS allows apps to
bind ports below 1024 without root access in contrast to Android. All
popular apps like messengers, banking, social media stuff, navigation,
media players, streaming, shopping etc. are usually available for iOS
and Android likewise since no big company can afford not to support both
platforms. Recently Apple was also forced to allow third-party app
stores - it may not be as flexible as Android which allows even to
download malware from any website and install it, but it's a step to
more flexibility nevertheless.

Also a lot of software available for Android phones is just garbage.
Just counting the number of available apps in the respective app stores
makes little sense. Having millions of games or stupid apps which just
got created to make money with ads or "in-app purchases" is not an
advantage on it's own.

> b. The promised support for competing Android flagships is 40% longer.

Is it? Google provides 7 years of updates for the Pixel 10 Pro. Apple
supports iPhones also around 7 years - that's why you can still get
updates for the iPhone 11 Pro which was released 6 years ago in 2019.

Also see:

<https://endoflife.date/pixel>
<https://endoflife.date/iphone>

-- 
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de

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

#150816

Arno Welzel wrote:
> Depends on how you define "software functionality". iOS allows apps to
> bind ports below 1024 without root access in contrast to Android.

Yup. The ability for apps to use privileged ports happens to be the only 
app functionality anyone on the Apple newsgroups has *ever* been able to 
find that isn't already on Android.

Meanwhile, Apple's iOS is the only consumer operating system that doesn't 
have many things such as system-wide firewalls & graphical wi-fi debuggers.

> popular apps like messengers, banking, social media stuff, navigation,
> media players, streaming, shopping etc. are usually available for iOS
> and Android likewise since no big company can afford not to support both
> platforms. 

What's missing from iOS isn't the stuff that every person uses, Arno.
What's missing from iOS is the stuff that technical people use.

Such as torrenting apps, for one example.

More inexplicable is that iOS won't allow the Tor browser on its devices.
And spoofing your GPS location for another example of what's not allowed.

Which is kind of funny since of all Apple's lies about privacy, Apple won't 
let some of the most powerful methods of gaining privacy on iOS platforms.

> Recently Apple was also forced to allow third-party app
> stores - it may not be as flexible as Android which allows even to
> download malware from any website and install it, but it's a step to
> more flexibility nevertheless.

Apple fought that tooth and nail, which I'm sure you're aware of.

Apple is like Russian diplomats, whose real goal is obvious.
Apple's goal is simply to limit your options so that Apple makes money.

All the lies about privacy and security are nothing to Apple.
They're just ways to maintain their culpable deniability on the fact that 
everything they do to lock down the barbed-wire prison garden is for 
profit.

Witness the fact that iOS is not safer than Android, for example.
The iOS users gave away everything for that - and yet it doesn't exist.

With all that in mind, the best insight I can offer the people on this
newsgroup is the observation Apple "said" that they locked ppl into the
barbed-wire prison garden for their safety. And yet, they gained no safety.

Why?
Apple lied.

They didn't lock ppl into the walled garden for their safety after all.
That is one of the insightful observations I can teach folks on this ng.

> Also a lot of software available for Android phones is just garbage.
> Just counting the number of available apps in the respective app stores
> makes little sense. 

Agree. But intelligent people have good aps, Arno. 
I have great apps.

Skyica. Muntashirakon. NewPipe. Aurora. FairEmail. NetGuard. Nova. 
Even intelligent people can't put any of that functionality on iOS.

I own iOS. I own Android. I use both every day. 
There's no comparison.

At best, iOS is a toy OS. 
It's fine for people who don't do anything.

Just like stock Android is fine for people who don't do anything.
If you don't do anything, both platforms do nothing just as well.

> Having millions of games or stupid apps which just
> got created to make money with ads or "in-app purchases" is not an
> advantage on it's own.

Whom are you arguing with on that idiotic tack, Arno?
Nobody to my knowledge was claiming the straw horse you're beating.

Nobody claimed Android has more apps.

What I'm saying is iOS is brain dead compared on Android.
In many ways. Very many ways.

One of which is you can't install useful apps such as some I listed above, 
and plenty more which are for people who "do something" with their devices.

If you do nothing with the device but play games, both do nothing the same.

>> b. The promised support for competing Android flagships is 40% longer.
> 
> Is it? Google provides 7 years of updates for the Pixel 10 Pro. Apple
> supports iPhones also around 7 years - that's why you can still get
> updates for the iPhone 11 Pro which was released 6 years ago in 2019.

Huh? Where have you been, Arno? Hiding under a rock?
Haven't you ever read the news?

 *Apple finally confirms in writing how long it will fully support iPhones* 
 *(it's 2 years less than Samsung Galaxy S & Google flagship support!)*
 <https://www.androidauthority.com/iphone-software-support-commitment-3449135/>

> <https://endoflife.date/pixel>
> <https://endoflife.date/iphone>

You're joking right? Tell me you're joking when you posted the iPhone link.
Apple has the *worst* hotfix support in the entire computer industry, Arno.

HINT: Apple has never in its entire history ever fully supported more than 
a single release at a time. If your device isn't on the latest release, you 
may as well throw it over the next bridge, its' that toxic, Arno.

Nobody else has full hotfix support that crappy in the computer industry.
Just Apple.

Don't you ever wonder why iOS has so many zero-day holes, Arno?
Their full hotfix support is, by far, the worst in the computer industry.

Ars Technica - Apple clarifies security update policy: Only the latest OSes 
are fully patched
 
 <https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2022/10/apple-clarifies-security-update-policy-only-the-latest-oses-are-fully-patched/>
 "Only the latest OSes are fully patched."

HotHardware - Apple admits it only fully patches security flaws in its 
latest OS releases
 <https://hothardware.com/news/apple-admits-only-fully-patches-security-flaws-in-latest-os-releases>
 "Old versions of operating systems of Apple devices do not get complete 
security patches."

Screen Rant - Apple product security update lifespan explained
 <https://screenrant.com/apple-product-security-update-lifespan/>
 "Only the latest releases provide full protection from security 
vulnerabilities."
 "Because of dependency on architecture and system changes to any current 
version, not all known security issues are addressed in previous versions"

Hell, Apple didn't even know how to build a hotfix until 2023 for God's 
sake. No wonder the iPhone is rife with zero-day holes everywhere.

 Apple Security Guide - Rapid Security Responses in Apple operating systems  
 <https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201224>  
 "New Rapid Security Responses are delivered only for the latest versions 
of iOS, iPadOS, and macOS, starting with iOS 16.4.1, iPadOS 16.4.1, and 
macOS 13.3.1."  
 "By default, your device automatically applies Rapid Security Responses; 
if you turn them off, those fixes are included in the next full software 
update instead."  

 Apple Support - About Rapid Security Responses for iOS, iPadOS, and macOS  
 <https://support.apple.com/en-ph/guide/security/sec87fc038c2/web>  
 "RSRs enable rapid delivery of ongoing and regular security improvements 
and can be removed or reapplied without reinstalling the entire OS." 
 "Rapid Security Responses deliver important security improvements between 
software updates"

Arno,
My advice is for you to get out from under that rock and read the news.

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

#150812

On 30/09/2025 2:55 am, Marion wrote:

<Snip>

> Your brain can't separate that it's two completely DIFFERENT arguments!
> a. The $35 phone runs more software functionality than a $1000 iPhone.
> b. The promised support for competing Android flagships is 40% longer.
> 
> This is (one reason) why I assess that Apple trolls lack formal education
> 
*IF* you are happy with the functionality of your $35 Android phone .... 
GREAT ..... but why, oh, why do you have to go on and on and on about it??

If other people want to waste *THEIR* money, why worry about it??
-- 
Daniel70

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

#150814

In article <10bgcls$3kjar$1@dont-email.me>,
 Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

> On 30/09/2025 2:55 am, Marion wrote:
> 
> <Snip>
> 
> > Your brain can't separate that it's two completely DIFFERENT arguments!
> > a. The $35 phone runs more software functionality than a $1000 iPhone.
> > b. The promised support for competing Android flagships is 40% longer.
> > 
> > This is (one reason) why I assess that Apple trolls lack formal education
> > 
> *IF* you are happy with the functionality of your $35 Android phone .... 
> GREAT ..... but why, oh, why do you have to go on and on and on about it??
> 
> If other people want to waste *THEIR* money, why worry about it??

Discussion for the sake of discussion is one thing but at a certain 
point it feels like mindless trolling for the sake of getting a rise. I 
worry that some people never progressed past the temptation to say "my 
dad can beat up your dad!"

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

#150815

Smithwicks wrote:
>>> Your brain can't separate that it's two completely DIFFERENT arguments!
>>> a. The $35 phone runs more software functionality than a $1000 iPhone.
>>> b. The promised support for competing Android flagships is 40% longer.
>>> 
>>> This is (one reason) why I assess that Apple trolls lack formal education
>>> 
>> *IF* you are happy with the functionality of your $35 Android phone .... 
>> GREAT ..... but why, oh, why do you have to go on and on and on about it??
>> 
>> If other people want to waste *THEIR* money, why worry about it??
> 
> Discussion for the sake of discussion is one thing but at a certain 
> point it feels like mindless trolling for the sake of getting a rise. I 
> worry that some people never progressed past the temptation to say "my 
> dad can beat up your dad!"

The lesson here is not so much that Apple also lied about locking people
into the barbed-wire prison garden for their safety, as everyone who is
intelligent is well aware Apple's safety is the worst in the industry.

What even some intelligent people don't realize, is that they lost all that
security by buying an iPhone and yet they didn't gain any functionality.

Other than the ability to use privileged ports, nobody on Usenet on the
Apple groups in the decade I've been asking the question, can find even a
single app functionality on iOS that isn't already long ago on Android.

Which is the point of the $35 phone comment on functionality.
It's not the phone. It's that iOS lacks basic functionality.

Every Android phone ever made has more app functionality than any iPhone.
People who focus on the price are stupid. They can't get a simple point.

Stupid people can't understand what all intelligent people already know.
The iPhone uses a toy operating system which drastically limits
functionality, which Apple says is "for your safety". 

Heh heh heh... and yet, the iPhone is toxic with zero-day bugs.
Because iOS has the worst bugfix support in the computer industry.

Intelligent people are different than ignorant people.

Ignorant people believe every single thing fed to them.
Fed to them by (rather brilliant) Apple marketing.

We're not even talking that current iPhones lack the hardware that most
Android phones have (such as the portable memory and aux jack hardware).

We're talking basic app functionality.
See my comment to Arno for just a sample of that missing functionality.

Only iOS lacks such basic functionality which Apple "says" is removed "for
your safety" and yet, the iPhone is no more safe than any Android phone.

Fancy that.
Apple lied.

It used to be Apple only told the truth in court.
But recent events show that Apple lies even in court.

Anyone who doesn't know that Apple's support is the worst in the industry,
has never read the news. Anyone who thinks Apple devices are more secure, 
has been hiding under the same rock that I accused Arno of hiding under.

These are IMPORTANT facts to be aware of.
Which is why I'm teaching them to you.

Your choice whether you want to move from ignorant to informed.
Totally up to you.

I await your educated response.

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

#150821

On 2025-09-30 16:02:55 +0000, Smithwicks said:
> In article <10bgcls$3kjar$1@dont-email.me>,
>  Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
>> On 30/09/2025 2:55 am, Marion wrote:
>> 
>> <Snip>
>> 
>>> Your brain can't separate that it's two completely DIFFERENT arguments!
>>> a. The $35 phone runs more software functionality than a $1000 iPhone.
>>> b. The promised support for competing Android flagships is 40% longer.
>>> 
>>> This is (one reason) why I assess that Apple trolls lack formal education
>>> 
>> *IF* you are happy with the functionality of your $35 Android phone ....
>> GREAT ..... but why, oh, why do you have to go on and on and on about it??
>> 
>> If other people want to waste *THEIR* money, why worry about it??
> 
> Discussion for the sake of discussion is one thing but at a certain
> point it feels like mindless trolling for the sake of getting a rise. I
> worry that some people never progressed past the temptation to say "my
> dad can beat up your dad!"

Arlen's "dad" is apparently a slow piece of el cheapo Android crap with 
five year old tech inside it and he's never even seen Apple's "dad".

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

#150825

Your Name wrote on 9/30/2025 2:36 PM:
> On 2025-09-30 16:02:55 +0000, Smithwicks said:
>> In article <10bgcls$3kjar$1@dont-email.me>,
>>  Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
>>> On 30/09/2025 2:55 am, Marion wrote:
>>>
>>> <Snip>
>>>
>>>> Your brain can't separate that it's two completely DIFFERENT arguments!
>>>> a. The $35 phone runs more software functionality than a $1000 iPhone.
>>>> b. The promised support for competing Android flagships is 40% longer.
>>>>
>>>> This is (one reason) why I assess that Apple trolls lack formal 
>>>> education
>>>>
>>> *IF* you are happy with the functionality of your $35 Android phone ....
>>> GREAT ..... but why, oh, why do you have to go on and on and on about 
>>> it??
>>>
>>> If other people want to waste *THEIR* money, why worry about it??
>>
>> Discussion for the sake of discussion is one thing but at a certain
>> point it feels like mindless trolling for the sake of getting a rise. I
>> worry that some people never progressed past the temptation to say "my
>> dad can beat up your dad!"
> 
> Arlen's "dad" is apparently a slow piece of el cheapo Android crap with 
> five year old tech inside it and he's never even seen Apple's "dad".
> 

That's why I'm waiting for Jolly Roger to weigh in on this.

He knows all kind of apple stuff.  Real smart.

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

#150758

My argument is that Apple support is the *worst* in the industry.

While the trolls (who know nothing about the topic at hand) troll, 
these are on-topic facts about the TRUTH of operating system support.

These are proven cited facts we covered in depth already on this thread.

1. *iOS written legally-obligated promised full support is far shorter*
   than that of Google/Samsung flagships (i.e., about 1/3rd shorter).
   Windows takes the cake though, in terms of years of full support. 
   <https://www.androidauthority.com/iphone-software-support-commitment-3449135/>

2. *iOS has had 1-1/2 times the known exploits as Android has had.*
   <https://www.cisa.gov/known-exploited-vulnerabilities-catalog>
   (But Windows takes the cake many times over in terms of exploits). 
  <https://blog.ostorlab.co/known_exploitable_vulnerabilities_catching_them_all.html> 

3. *Apple has never fully supported more than a single release* while
   every other major OS OEM has fully supported multiple releases.
   <https://support.apple.com/en-ca/guide/deployment/depc4c80847a/web>
   Android takes the cake here but Windows isn't too shoddy either.

Keeping on topic and not responding to the trolls who can only subtract
value since they know nothing about the topic, here is yet another
well-cited fact about Apple's astoundingly atrocious QA process.

4. *Large portions of the iOS code have never once been through testing!*

Google Project Zero - A very deep dive into iOS Exploit chains found in the
wild
<https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2019/08/a-very-deep-dive-into-ios-exploit.html>
 "We'll see cases of code which seems to have never worked, code that
likely skipped QA or likely had little testing or review before being
shipped to users."
This is explicit acknowledgement that significant portions of iOS shipped
with untested or nonfunctional code.

Google Threat Analysis Group - State-backed attackers and commercial
surveillance vendors repeatedly use the same exploits
<https://blog.google/threat-analysis-group/state-backed-attackers-and-commercial-surveillance-vendors-repeatedly-use-the-same-exploits/>
 "In each iteration of the watering hole campaigns, the attackers used
exploits that were identical or strikingly similar to exploits previously
used by commercial surveillance vendors."

Project Zero - JITSploitation: Three zero-days and one cached JIT spray
 <https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2020/09/jitsploitation-three.html>
"This three-part series highlights the technical challenges involved in
finding and exploiting JavaScript engine vulnerabilities in modern web
browsers and evaluates current exploit mitigation technologies."
This shows Apple's mitigations weren┤ catching known exploit patterns.

Vice - Google Project Zero bugs used to hack iPhones and Android phones
<https://www.vice.com/en/article/google-project-zero-bugs-used-to-hack-iphones-and-android-phones>
"Researchers at Google's Project Zero uncovered vulnerabilities in WebKit
and JIT engines that were quietly patched by Apple and Google after being
exploited in the wild."
The need for third-party researchers to find and exploit these flaws
indicates they were not caught by Apple's in-house testing.

In summary, above are FACTS which the trolls can't understand nor dispute.
But those facts play into my assessment *iOS is the worst supported OS*.

Is there even *one* way that iOS is better supported than the others?

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

#150763

Marion <marionf@fact.com> wrote:
> My argument is that Apple support is the *worst* in the industry.
> 
> While the trolls (who know nothing about the topic at hand) troll, 
> these are on-topic facts about the TRUTH of operating system support.

Shouting doesn't make your errors or lies any more true. 

> These are proven cited facts we covered in depth already on this thread.
> 
> 1. *iOS written legally-obligated promised full support is far shorter*
>    than that of Google/Samsung flagships (i.e., about 1/3rd shorter).
>    Windows takes the cake though, in terms of years of full support. 
>    <https://www.androidauthority.com/iphone-software-support-commitment-3449135/>

Factcheck: ambiguous. There's no "legal obligation" required here and the
quoted support timelines are minimums. 

> 2. *iOS has had 1-1/2 times the known exploits as Android has had.*
>    <https://www.cisa.gov/known-exploited-vulnerabilities-catalog>

You have been told and corrected many times that that claim is not
supported by the URL and you *never* show your workings. 

Factcheck: does not support claim. 

>    (But Windows takes the cake many times over in terms of exploits). 
>   <https://blog.ostorlab.co/known_exploitable_vulnerabilities_catching_them_all.html> 

You're conflating Microsoft/Apple with Windows/iOS. If you actually looking
at the CISA link you boringly post all the time you'd see the difference.
NB: remember that searching for "iOS" also finds cisco's IOS and FortiOS.

Factcheck: does not support the claim. 

> 3. *Apple has never fully supported more than a single release* while
>    every other major OS OEM has fully supported multiple releases.
>    <https://support.apple.com/en-ca/guide/deployment/depc4c80847a/web>
>    Android takes the cake here but Windows isn't too shoddy either.

Your link contradicts you. The very bottom table shows that iOS 18.7 and
iOS 26 are both fully supported until 15th December. 

Factcheck: does not support the claim. 

> Keeping on topic and not responding to the trolls who can only subtract
> value since they know nothing about the topic, here is yet another
> well-cited fact about Apple's astoundingly atrocious QA process.
> 
> 4. *Large portions of the iOS code have never once been through testing!*
> 
> Google Project Zero - A very deep dive into iOS Exploit chains found in the
> wild
> <https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2019/08/a-very-deep-dive-into-ios-exploit.html>
>  "We'll see cases of code which seems to have never worked, code that
> likely skipped QA or likely had little testing or review before being
> shipped to users."
> This is explicit acknowledgement that significant portions of iOS shipped
> with untested or nonfunctional code.
> 
> Google Threat Analysis Group - State-backed attackers and commercial
> surveillance vendors repeatedly use the same exploits
> <https://blog.google/threat-analysis-group/state-backed-attackers-and-commercial-surveillance-vendors-repeatedly-use-the-same-exploits/>
>  "In each iteration of the watering hole campaigns, the attackers used
> exploits that were identical or strikingly similar to exploits previously
> used by commercial surveillance vendors."
> 
> Project Zero - JITSploitation: Three zero-days and one cached JIT spray
>  <https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2020/09/jitsploitation-three.html>
> "This three-part series highlights the technical challenges involved in
> finding and exploiting JavaScript engine vulnerabilities in modern web
> browsers and evaluates current exploit mitigation technologies."
> This shows Apple's mitigations werenąt catching known exploit patterns.
> 
> Vice - Google Project Zero bugs used to hack iPhones and Android phones
> <https://www.vice.com/en/article/google-project-zero-bugs-used-to-hack-iphones-and-android-phones>
> "Researchers at Google's Project Zero uncovered vulnerabilities in WebKit
> and JIT engines that were quietly patched by Apple and Google after being
> exploited in the wild."
> The need for third-party researchers to find and exploit these flaws
> indicates they were not caught by Apple's in-house testing.

factcheck: claim it's overblown with respect to very detailed and narrow
analyses. 

> In summary, above are FACTS which the trolls can't understand nor dispute.
> But those facts play into my assessment *iOS is the worst supported OS*.

None of your above claims are facts. Plus your global claim is a
comparative statement ("worst"). 3-4 of your claims only relate to iOS and
make no relative judgement compared to other OSes. Your sources cannot say
whether iOS is better or worse than the others. 

In summary, as per usual, you're talking out of your arse. 

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

#150691

Your Name,

>> I'm sorry that you could not parse my post far enough to see that
>> I already gave you several.  Not really my problem though.
> <snip>
>
> Nobody needs to name a *single* "fact" that the village idiot "Arlen"
> posts which is wrong ... when absolutely *EVERYTHING* that moron posts is
> completely wrong!!   :-\

well, he sometimes, by accident or not, /does/ say things that are correct.

Like in this thread where he mentioned the live-cycle and end-of-support for
Win 10 correctly.

... but somehow he can't seem to combine all the facts and "facts"* he
gathered to arrive at "assessments", claims and "facts" that have much of
anything to do with reality.

* it doesn't help that some of the "facts" Arlen refers to are just someone
elses assessments put on a webpage.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

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

#150701

Chris wrote:
> You never respond to those, of course: deny, deflect, ignore.

Just responding to your crap, wastes my valuable time & that of others.
You Apple trolls claim the earth is flat.

Why?
Because Apple marketing told you that the earth is flat.

There is no amount of adult discourse that can possibly occur with you.
Because you insist the earth is flat out of nothing but religious belief.

If an adult even tries to reason with you that the earth is not flat, all
you'll do is never click on the links and simply say all facts are wrong.

It's what you rather strange Apple trolls do, Chris. 
Every one of you Apple trolls do this, Chris.
 Alan Baker
 Alan Browne
 Haemactylus
 -hh
 JF Mezei
 Jolly Roger
 Lewis
 nospam
 Tom Elam
 Tyrone
 Your Name

To be clear, a few of the non-Apple trolls do what you Apple trolls do.
 Kerr-Mudd, John
 MikeS
 Rudy Wieser
 sticks

And a few others I don't recall offhand.

All you strange trolls are similar in that none of you ever add any value.
You only subtract value from Usenet.

Just responding to your crap, wastes my valuable time & that of others.

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

#150702

Arlen,

> Chris wrote:
>> You never respond to those, of course: deny, deflect, ignore.
>
> Just responding to your crap, wastes my valuable time & that
> of others.

No arlen, just yours.

Than again, *everyone* wastes your time when they do not agree with you.

> You Apple trolls claim the earth is flat.

You must have a rather sore thumb with always sucking "facts" like that 
outof it.

> To be clear, a few of the non-Apple trolls do what you Apple
> trolls do.
...
> Rudy Wieser
...

Phew, I was a bit afraid that I *wouldn't* be in your "bad person" list.

Hey, I've shown you time-and-again that I don't believe your "facts", claims 
and now "assessments", so I deserve to be in it. :-)

By the way, did you ever figure out what a "cite" is supposed to be looking 
like ?

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

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

#150703

On 2025-09-24 18:05:46 +0000, R.Wieser said:
> Arlen,
>> Chris wrote:
>>> You never respond to those, of course: deny, deflect, ignore.
>> 
>> Just responding to your crap, wastes my valuable time & that
>> of others.
> 
> No arlen, just yours.
> 
> Than again, *everyone* wastes your time when they do not agree with you.
> 
>> You Apple trolls claim the earth is flat.
> 
> You must have a rather sore thumb with always sucking "facts" like that 
> outof it.

"thumb"?!?
He gets all his "facts" out of his backside / bumhole, just like Trump 
the Chump, who is probably the village idiot Arlen's idol.




>> To be clear, a few of the non-Apple trolls do what you Apple
>> trolls do.
> ...
>> Rudy Wieser
> ...
> 
> Phew, I was a bit afraid that I *wouldn't* be in your "bad person" list.
> 
> Hey, I've shown you time-and-again that I don't believe your "facts", 
> claims and now "assessments", so I deserve to be in it. :-)
> 
> By the way, did you ever figure out what a "cite" is supposed to be 
> looking like ?
> 
> Regards,
> Rudy Wieser

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

#150706

Your Name wrote on 9/24/2025 4:27 PM:
> On 2025-09-24 18:05:46 +0000, R.Wieser said:
>> Arlen,
>>> Chris wrote:
>>>> You never respond to those, of course: deny, deflect, ignore.
>>>
>>> Just responding to your crap, wastes my valuable time & that
>>> of others.
>>
>> No arlen, just yours.
>>
>> Than again, *everyone* wastes your time when they do not agree with you.
>>
>>> You Apple trolls claim the earth is flat.
>>
>> You must have a rather sore thumb with always sucking "facts" like 
>> that outof it.
> 
> "thumb"?!?
> He gets all his "facts" out of his backside / bumhole, just like Trump 
> the Chump, who is probably the village idiot Arlen's idol.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>>> To be clear, a few of the non-Apple trolls do what you Apple
>>> trolls do.
>> ...
>>> Rudy Wieser
>> ...
>>
>> Phew, I was a bit afraid that I *wouldn't* be in your "bad person" list.
>>
>> Hey, I've shown you time-and-again that I don't believe your "facts", 
>> claims and now "assessments", so I deserve to be in it. :-)
>>
>> By the way, did you ever figure out what a "cite" is supposed to be 
>> looking like ?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Rudy Wieser
> 

He sure hates apples.

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

#150710

Hank,

> He sure hates apples.

And Android, and people who do not agree with him and ... well, pretty-much 
everything else.

Except for Windows ofcourse. :-)

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

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

#150719

Facts.

Microsoft clearly has fully supported more than one release at a time as
had Google/Samsung for flagship phones but Apple has never ever done that.

Apple won't market that Apple has never fully supported more than one
release at a time, but security researchers forced Apple to come clean!
<https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2022/10/apple-clarifies-security-update-policy-only-the-latest-oses-are-fully-patched/>
<https://hothardware.com/news/apple-admits-only-fully-patches-security-flaws-in-latest-os-releases>
<https://screenrant.com/apple-product-security-update-lifespan/>

Since the Apple trolls brazenly deny that those facts are true, without
even clicking on the links, which we've had full threads discussing, so
they simply say the links don't exist because they *hate* that they do.

The first defense of Apple trolls is to claim everything bad about Apple
must be a lie, so, Apple trolls never click on the links which have been
supplied to them a thousand times for years & they don't click them.

  Apple trolls simply say anything bad about Apple must be a lie.

Even when those links above cite Apple's own links for their facts!
 *About software updates for Apple devices*
 <https://support.apple.com/guide/deployment/about-software-updates-depc4c80847a/web>

There is no Apple troll with the intellect to parse that clever Apple speak
but even Apple must write the truth in such public documents which is... 

For bugfix releases:
   "Not all known security issues are addressed in previous versions"
For release patches:
   "Rapid Security Responses are delivered only for the latest versions 
    of iOS, iPadOS, and macOS. Because of this, the operating systems
    need to be using the latest version."

The Apple trolls have been given all these links for years, and for years,
Apple trolls have denied these links even exist as they have never clicked
on the links and yet the Apple trolls are *desperate* to find any loophole,
they can imagine to deny the simple basic fact that Apple has never in its
entire history ever fully supported more than a one release at a time.

No other major operating system vendor has support that bad.
Only Apple.

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

#150711

Your Name,

>> You must have a rather sore thumb with always sucking "facts" like that 
>> outof it.
>
> "thumb"?!?
> He gets all his "facts" out of his backside / bumhole,

No, no, no.  A butthole is to stick ones head in (which he's also doing), 
not to suck on.  Blerg ! :-)

> just like Trump the Chump, who is probably the village idiot Arlen's idol.

Yeah, I also noticed the similarities, but didn't want to pull politics into 
this newsgroup as there might be a number of MAGA people here too.  Just 
imagine the flame-war that could/would ensue. :-|

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

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

#150721

FACTS.

You can cite a fact to Apple trolls a thousand times & they deny it exists.
They even claim you never gave them that cite before denying it exists.

And yet, they've been taught that fact a thousand times already on this ng.
Apple trolls deny that any fact can exist if it explains what Apple does.

For many years the Apple trolls have claimed Apple fixes all known bugs in
older releases even as they've been supplied a thousand times these facts
showing Apple has never fully supported more than just the one latest
release (which, let's be clear, is the worst OS support in the industry!).

FACT: Apple has never fully supported more than a single release at a time.

Apple Support - About software updates for Apple devices
 <https://support.apple.com/en-ca/guide/deployment/depc4c80847a/web>

Which says, for bugfix releases:
   "Not all known security issues are addressed in previous versions"

And which says, for release patches:
   "Rapid Security Responses are delivered only for the latest versions 
    of iOS, iPadOS, and macOS. Because of this, the operating systems
    need to be using the latest version."

Bear in mind the specific terminology used by Apple which the Apple trolls
clearly don't own the intellect to decipher, but which is explained below.

In Apple's support documents above, "bugfix releases" are called "software
updates (or minor software updates)" by Apple when they say "Software
updates "consist of frequently released patches that help secure or enhance
the current operating system and that are designed to keep devices
protected." Rapid Security Responses are described by Apple as "a different
type of software release for applying security fixes to devices more
frequently by not requiring a full software update" and also "are delivered
only for the latest versions of iOS, iPadOS, and macOS."

Apple Support - About Rapid Security Responses for iOS, iPadOS & macOS
 <https://support.apple.com/en-ph/guide/security/sec87fc038c2/web>

Apple Security Guide - Rapid Security Responses in Apple operating systems
 <https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201224>

FACT: Apple has never fully supported more than a single release at a time.
NOTE: Every other major OS vendor has fully supported more than 1 release.

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

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

Back to top | Article view | comp.mobile.android

csiph-web