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

Groups > comp.mobile.android > #31548 > unrolled thread

Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike

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

Contents

  Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike Aardvarks <aardvarks@a.b.c.com> - 2016-07-12 21:46 +0000
    Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike Elias <elias@nowherenohow.com> - 2016-07-12 17:34 -0500
      Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2016-07-13 13:45 +1200
        Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2016-07-13 09:00 +0100
          Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2016-07-14 10:05 +1200
        Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike David Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> - 2016-07-13 09:15 +0100
          Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-07-13 04:51 -0400
            Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike Aardvarks <aardvarks@a.b.c.com> - 2016-07-13 18:52 +0000
              Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-07-13 15:08 -0400
                Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-07-13 20:28 +0100
                Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike Aardvarks <aardvarks@a.b.c.com> - 2016-07-13 22:29 +0000
              Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike Aardvarks <aardvarks@a.b.c.com> - 2016-07-14 21:18 +0000
                Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-07-14 18:16 -0400
                  Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike Aardvarks <aardvarks@a.b.c.com> - 2016-07-15 02:06 +0000
                    Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike Aardvarks <aardvarks@a.b.c.com> - 2016-07-16 04:21 +0000
                      Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike Aardvarks <aardvarks@a.b.c.com> - 2016-07-16 04:26 +0000
                      Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2016-07-15 23:05 -0700
                        Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike David Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> - 2016-07-16 10:06 +0100
                        Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-07-16 08:11 -0400
                        Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike Aardvarks <aardvarks@a.b.c.com> - 2016-07-16 18:31 +0000
                  Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike PAS <abc@doremi.net> - 2016-07-15 09:38 -0400
                    Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-07-15 09:59 -0400
                      Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike Aardvarks <aardvarks@a.b.c.com> - 2016-07-15 18:14 +0000
                      Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike Aardvarks <aardvarks@a.b.c.com> - 2016-07-15 18:14 +0000
                    Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike Aardvarks <aardvarks@a.b.c.com> - 2016-07-15 18:10 +0000
                  Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike Aardvarks <aardvarks@a.b.c.com> - 2016-07-16 04:09 +0000
                Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike Michael Eyd <invalid@eyd.de> - 2016-07-15 10:39 +0200
                  Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike Aardvarks <aardvarks@a.b.c.com> - 2016-07-15 18:18 +0000
                    Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-07-15 15:25 -0400
                      Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike Aardvarks <aardvarks@a.b.c.com> - 2016-07-16 04:35 +0000
    Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike FPP <fredp151@gmail.com> - 2016-07-13 01:55 -0400
      Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike Aardvarks <aardvarks@a.b.c.com> - 2016-07-13 06:38 +0000
        Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike Aardvarks <aardvarks@a.b.c.com> - 2016-07-13 06:46 +0000
          Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike FPP <fredp151@gmail.com> - 2016-07-13 04:33 -0400
            Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike Aardvarks <aardvarks@a.b.c.com> - 2016-07-13 18:24 +0000
              Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-07-13 14:41 -0400
          Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-07-13 04:51 -0400
            Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike Aardvarks <aardvarks@a.b.c.com> - 2016-07-13 18:54 +0000
        Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike FPP <fredp151@gmail.com> - 2016-07-13 04:31 -0400
          Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike Aardvarks <aardvarks@a.b.c.com> - 2016-07-13 18:17 +0000
      Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike PAS <abc@doremi.net> - 2016-07-13 10:33 -0400
    Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2016-07-13 08:58 +0100
      Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike Aardvarks <aardvarks@a.b.c.com> - 2016-07-13 18:10 +0000
    Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike Gordon Levi <gordon@address.invalid> - 2016-07-13 18:22 +1000
    Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-07-13 11:35 +0100
    Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike Joe W DiDomenico <email@domain.com> - 2016-07-13 08:22 -0400
    Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike Michael Eyd <invalid@eyd.de> - 2016-07-13 14:41 +0200
      Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike Aardvarks <aardvarks@a.b.c.com> - 2016-07-13 22:20 +0000
        Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-07-13 18:30 -0400
    Re: Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike BobbyK <bknight@Conramp.net> - 2016-07-13 17:35 -0500

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

#31548 — Question for Apple apologists & Android enthusiasts alike

The Apple apologists were extolling the virtues of living in the walled 
garden in another thread, so, I snapped this picture moments ago of my 
camera and spare equipment...
http://i.cubeupload.com/PYm9y5.jpg

Regarding that equipment ask here two questions:
1. What else did you add to your Android equipment?
2. How would the Apple apologists do the same thing? 

The photo shows:
a. Samsung Galaxy S3
b. A spare back for each battery (3 backs in total)
c. Two normal-sized replacement batteries (2,300 mAh with NFC)
d. One large-sized replacement battery (7,000 mAh with NFC)
d. A spare charger for those batteries (with a spare USB output)
e. A waterproof USB tube camera with lights and on a 3-foot cable with a 
switch

I forget what the spare equipment and camera cost, but it was under $50 in 
total as I recall.

The question for Apple apologists is:
Q: How do you do that & how much does it cost you to do that?

The question for Android enthusiasts is:
Q: What else did you do for your Android equipment recently?
http://i.cubeupload.com/PYm9y5.jpg

Pictures requested (since we prove what we say).

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#31552

On Tue, 12 Jul 2016 21:46:05 +0000 (UTC), Aardvarks
<aardvarks@a.b.c.com> wrote:

>The Apple apologists were extolling the virtues of living in the walled 
>garden in another thread, so, I snapped this picture moments ago of my 
>camera and spare equipment...
>http://i.cubeupload.com/PYm9y5.jpg
>
>Regarding that equipment ask here two questions:
>1. What else did you add to your Android equipment?
>2. How would the Apple apologists do the same thing? 
>
>The photo shows:
>a. Samsung Galaxy S3
>b. A spare back for each battery (3 backs in total)
>c. Two normal-sized replacement batteries (2,300 mAh with NFC)
>d. One large-sized replacement battery (7,000 mAh with NFC)
>d. A spare charger for those batteries (with a spare USB output)
>e. A waterproof USB tube camera with lights and on a 3-foot cable with a 
>switch
>
>I forget what the spare equipment and camera cost, but it was under $50 in 
>total as I recall.
>
>The question for Apple apologists is:
>Q: How do you do that & how much does it cost you to do that?
>
>The question for Android enthusiasts is:
>Q: What else did you do for your Android equipment recently?
>http://i.cubeupload.com/PYm9y5.jpg
>
>Pictures requested (since we prove what we say).


The only thing I did for my Samsung S4 is to get a set of earphones
some two years ago.  Sorry, no picture since it isn't worth the time.

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

#31556

In article <01saobh1vksueb63l8combur7fg2ldb6hf@4ax.com>, Elias
<elias@nowherenohow.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Jul 2016 21:46:05 +0000 (UTC), Aardvarks
> <aardvarks@a.b.c.com> wrote:
> > 
> >The Apple apologists were extolling the virtues of living in the walled 
> >garden in another thread, so, I snapped this picture moments ago of my 
> >camera and spare equipment...
> >http://i.cubeupload.com/PYm9y5.jpg
> >
> >Regarding that equipment ask here two questions:
> >1. What else did you add to your Android equipment?
> >2. How would the Apple apologists do the same thing? 
> >
> >The photo shows:
> >a. Samsung Galaxy S3
> >b. A spare back for each battery (3 backs in total)
> >c. Two normal-sized replacement batteries (2,300 mAh with NFC)
> >d. One large-sized replacement battery (7,000 mAh with NFC)
> >d. A spare charger for those batteries (with a spare USB output)
> >e. A waterproof USB tube camera with lights and on a 3-foot cable with a 
> >switch
> >
> >I forget what the spare equipment and camera cost, but it was under $50 in 
> >total as I recall.
> >
> >The question for Apple apologists is:
> >Q: How do you do that & how much does it cost you to do that?
> >
> >The question for Android enthusiasts is:
> >Q: What else did you do for your Android equipment recently?
> >http://i.cubeupload.com/PYm9y5.jpg
> >
> >Pictures requested (since we prove what we say).
> 
> The only thing I did for my Samsung S4 is to get a set of earphones
> some two years ago.  Sorry, no picture since it isn't worth the time.

Yep, apart from a case and apps (possibly a car holder / charger), and
for some replacement earpods / phones, most people don't actually "add"
anything to their mobile phones - they don't want to nor need to.

The Samsung Galaxy S3 is apparently such a massive piece of crap that
users need to carry around three extra batteries!! No wonder most
people want Apple iPhones. 

Of course, in reality, most Samsung Galaxy S3 users do not have three
extra batteries or any of the rest of that garbage, and Aardvarks is
simply one of those moronic geeky nutters who believe everyone else
does the same as they do.  :-\

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

#31567

Your Name wrote:

> The Samsung Galaxy S3 is apparently such a massive piece of crap that
> users need to carry around three extra batteries!! No wonder most
> people want Apple iPhones.

Lots of people I know using iPhones have fugly additional battery cases.

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

#31600

In article <dumapbFslplU2@mid.individual.net>, Andy Burns
<usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:

> Your Name wrote:
> 
> > The Samsung Galaxy S3 is apparently such a massive piece of crap that
> > users need to carry around three extra batteries!! No wonder most
> > people want Apple iPhones.
> 
> Lots of people I know using iPhones have fugly additional battery cases.

A.  A battery case isn't the same as carrying around three extra 
    batteries.

B.  It was a joke since most Samsung users don't need / want to 
    carry around three extra batteries either.

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

#31569

On 13/07/2016 02:45, Your Name wrote:
[]
No wonder most people want Apple iPhones.

Perhaps in the Japan, but not in Europe, US, China or Australia 
according to:

 
http://dazeinfo.com/2016/02/11/apple-iphone-android-smartphone-sales-2015-kantar-report/

-- 
Cheers,
David
Web: http://www.satsignal.eu

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

#31576

In article <nm4tar$q41$1@dont-email.me>, David Taylor
<david-taylor@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> wrote:

> > No wonder most people want Apple iPhones.
> 
> Perhaps in the Japan, but not in Europe, US, China or Australia 
> according to:
> 
> http://dazeinfo.com/2016/02/11/apple-iphone-android-smartphone-sales-2015-kantar-report/

you claim you're not anti-apple yet you keep posting stuff like that?

you don't understand that 'android' is anything from high end phones
such as the samsung galaxy (similar price to iphones) all the way down
to cheapo feature phones that sell for under $50. 

what you also don't realize is that those numbers don't mean a whole
lot. apple is making over 90% of the industry's profits. 

guess which companies will be around in a couple of years. the noname
chinese companies making $50 android phones or apple, samsung and htc
who make $500 phones.

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

#31595

On Wed, 13 Jul 2016 04:51:49 -0400, nospam wrote:

> you claim you're not anti-apple yet you keep posting stuff like that?

I'm not anti Apple any more than I'm anti Linux or anti Windows or anti
Android.

They're all *different*.

There are plenty of things I like about Linux, for example, but also plenty
of things I don't like (e.g., I hate Canonical Unity, for example, because
they tried to put a layer on top of Linux to help people find stuff that is
an abomination IMHO).

There are plenty of things I like about Windows for example, but also
plenty of things I hate (e.g., I hate Windows 8 where they tried to put a
layer on top of Windows to help people find stuff that is an abomination
IMHO).

There are plenty of things I like about Android, but the entire file system
is a mess. On Android, you can easily browse the file system, and it just
drives you nuts. For example they have a /mnt/sdcard0/Camera folder for
storing pictures and then a separate /mnt/sdcard0/Pictures folder which
actually doesn't store "pictures" (in the camera sense anyway), but
screenshots. 

There are plenty of things I like about iOS too - but the entire ecosystem
is designed from the top down to be the most restrictive of the bunch (for
example, you can transfer videos from Linux to the iOS file space of VLC at
will over a USB cable, but you can't do the same thing to the native video
apps). 

What prompted this thread was nospam saying that it's "nonsense" that
people can do more stuff on Android than they can on iOS.

That's *not* nonsense.
You can do a *lot* more on Android than you can on iOS.

I'm sure there are things you can do on iOS that you can't do on Android
too (e.g., almost everything within the walled garden).

I can't name anything useful that you can do on iOS that is *outside* the
walled garden that you can't do (usually easier or better) on Android
though.

Maybe you do?

> you don't understand that 'android' is anything from high end phones
> such as the samsung galaxy (similar price to iphones) all the way down
> to cheapo feature phones that sell for under $50.

To me, Android is the quality of the Samsung Galaxy S3 at the time it was
introduced, and the quality of the Nexus 5 at the time it was introduced,
and the quality of the current Nexus 6 or newer at the time it is
introduced.

I gave up on cheap (e.g., 4MB) Android phones.

To me, the bare minimum Android phone needs:
a. CPU usually dual or quad core, and at a good speed (1.7GHz or better)
b. RAM usually 2MB or more nowadays
c. Storage usually an absolute bare minimum of 16GB (more preferred)
d. Display as good as it gets (I'm not sure the current standard) 

In addition, I vastly prefer:
e. Expansion slot (for easy cheap and permanent archival of data)
f. Removable battery (to allow multiple batteries when needed)
g. Operating system able to be upgraded (if desired)

While I, myself, don't like to upgrade iOS (because Apple doesn't test my
configuration and has shown that they break it even in super minor OS
updates), it still would be nice to update the Android on my Samsung Galaxy
S3 just for the fun of it.

I'm stuck on version 4.3, and it's just too difficult to update it, which
is one area where Apple beats Android hands down.
 
> what you also don't realize is that those numbers don't mean a whole
> lot. apple is making over 90% of the industry's profits. 

That Apple is one of the most successful companies in the world is not a
debate that anyone can argue against.

I never said that the Apple afficianados don't LOVE their equipment!
In fact, I said that the kids I buy phones for LOVE Apple equipment, where
I have to force them to enjoy Android (and they do).

In the end, a high-end phone is a high-end phone.
It takes no brains to buy a high-end phone.

The brains are exercised when trying to find the best price:performance
phone.
 
> guess which companies will be around in a couple of years. the noname
> chinese companies making $50 android phones or apple, samsung and htc
> who make $500 phones.

While I have bought $50 Android phones in the past, I swore off any phone
that isn't at least 16GB, 1GHZ, 2MB, and of a decent display, which means
the *cheapest* phone I can possibly get is $200 and more likely, I would
choose to give as gifts the phones in the $300 range.

So, I'm talking about phones that start at six times the price that you're
talking about. Big difference, I'm sure you'll agree.

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

#31597

In article <nm62l2$ivi$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Aardvarks
<aardvarks@a.b.c.com> wrote:

> I'm not anti Apple any more than I'm anti Linux or anti Windows or anti
> Android.

bullshit.

> They're all *different*.

if you stopped there, that'd be fine.

the problem is that you only rant about apple. you never rant about
linux, windows or android. 

you keep yapping how apple users 'just give up' because they 'can't do
it' (which is of course complete bullshit).

> There are plenty of things I like about Linux, for example, but also plenty
> of things I don't like (e.g., I hate Canonical Unity, for example, because
> they tried to put a layer on top of Linux to help people find stuff that is
> an abomination IMHO).
> 
> There are plenty of things I like about Windows for example, but also
> plenty of things I hate (e.g., I hate Windows 8 where they tried to put a
> layer on top of Windows to help people find stuff that is an abomination
> IMHO).

it's not a layer and not an abomination. 

> There are plenty of things I like about Android, but the entire file system
> is a mess. On Android, you can easily browse the file system, and it just
> drives you nuts. For example they have a /mnt/sdcard0/Camera folder for
> storing pictures and then a separate /mnt/sdcard0/Pictures folder which
> actually doesn't store "pictures" (in the camera sense anyway), but
> screenshots. 

that's exactly why going beyond the limitations of the file system is
important and it's not just apple either.

> There are plenty of things I like about iOS too - but the entire ecosystem
> is designed from the top down to be the most restrictive of the bunch (for
> example, you can transfer videos from Linux to the iOS file space of VLC at
> will over a USB cable, but you can't do the same thing to the native video
> apps). 

nonsense. it's very easy to transfer anything to/from ios devices, but
any time anyone explains various ways, you reject them and go on a rant
about bluetooth.

> What prompted this thread was nospam saying that it's "nonsense" that
> people can do more stuff on Android than they can on iOS.

i never said any such thing. stop lying.

> That's *not* nonsense.
> You can do a *lot* more on Android than you can on iOS.

wrong. 

as you aid above
> They're all *different*.

there are things that each platform can do that the other cannot. 

pick the best tool for the job.

> I'm sure there are things you can do on iOS that you can't do on Android
> too (e.g., almost everything within the walled garden).

there are, but you refuse to acknowledge any of it.

> I can't name anything useful that you can do on iOS that is *outside* the
> walled garden that you can't do (usually easier or better) on Android
> though.

useful is subjective.

the things that you keep yapping about that android can do that ios
can't, such as bluetooth file transfer, are *not* useful to anyone
(other than you) because better methods exist for all platforms (not
just apple).

> Maybe you do?

i do.

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

#31598

On Wed, 13 Jul 2016 20:08:01 +0100, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> In article <nm62l2$ivi$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Aardvarks
> <aardvarks@a.b.c.com> wrote:
>
[]
> bullshit.
>
>> They're all *different*.
>

> you keep yapping how apple users 'just give up' because they 'can't do
> it' (which is of course complete bullshit).
>
[]

>
> it's not a layer and not an abomination.
>
[]
>
> nonsense.
[]

>
> i never said any such thing. stop lying.
[]
> wrong.
>
It's legendary internet nay-sayer Rod!

-- 
Bah, and indeed, Humbug

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

#31609

On Wed, 13 Jul 2016 15:08:01 -0400, nospam wrote:

> the problem is that you only rant about apple. you never rant about
> linux, windows or android.

Heh heh ... oh yes I do.
I just have a nym for that.

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

#31647

On Thu, 14 Jul 2016 08:50:04 +0200, Bernd Fröhlich wrote:

>> I can't name anything useful that you can do on iOS that is *outside* the
>> walled garden that you can't do (usually easier or better) on Android
>> though.
> 
> One thing comes to mind very fast: I can get system updates for iOS.
> Even for devices that are several years old.

While it's clear that Apple updates its users' devices for a far longer
time period than do the various Android device manufacturers, that, in and
of itself, is not meaningful in terms of "doing anything useful".

It's just window dressing, in that the old iOS couldn't do all the
functions previously listed, and neither can the new iOS version.

So the ability to update for longer periods of time, while definitely
admirable, adds very little functionality that Android doesn't already
supply without the ability to update the OS.

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

#31656

In article <nm8vib$oi1$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Aardvarks
<aardvarks@a.b.c.com> wrote:

> 
> >> I can't name anything useful that you can do on iOS that is *outside* the
> >> walled garden that you can't do (usually easier or better) on Android
> >> though.
> > 
> > One thing comes to mind very fast: I can get system updates for iOS.
> > Even for devices that are several years old.
> 
> While it's clear that Apple updates its users' devices for a far longer
> time period than do the various Android device manufacturers, that, in and
> of itself, is not meaningful in terms of "doing anything useful".
>
> It's just window dressing, in that the old iOS couldn't do all the
> functions previously listed, and neither can the new iOS version.
>
> So the ability to update for longer periods of time, while definitely
> admirable, adds very little functionality that Android doesn't already
> supply without the ability to update the OS.

nonsense.

you're only trying to rationalize not getting as many software updates,
if any.

a 4-5 year old ios device is *still* supported, while a 2-3 year old
android device is typically orphaned.

put another way, you'd need to buy two android devices in a given time
period, versus one ios device.

now which is the better 'value' ?

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

#31708

On Thu, 14 Jul 2016 18:16:37 -0400, nospam wrote:

> nonsense.
> 
> you're only trying to rationalize not getting as many software updates,
> if any.
> 
> a 4-5 year old ios device is *still* supported, while a 2-3 year old
> android device is typically orphaned.
> 
> put another way, you'd need to buy two android devices in a given time
> period, versus one ios device.
> 
> now which is the better 'value' ?

Below is a list of a dozen and a half things you can do on an *old* Android
operating system that can't be done on any current iOS device:
- Load software outside the Apple ecosystem 
- Change the launcher to entirely change the look & feel
- Control what data programs have access to from other programs
- Traverse & modify the entire file system (or almost all of it)
- Add a free second-line telephone numbers such as "Sideline"
- Install the "real" Tor Browser Bundle and "Obot" anonymous VPN
- Redirect files & types of files at will (File Redirector)
- Perform detailed wardriving (such as what WiGle WiFi does)
- Organize the desktop with icons on any grid whatsoever
- Hide *any* icon whatsoever no matter what the icon is
- Put icons in multiple places for logical organization
- Create empty named placeholder folders for organization
- Automatically record calls in juristictions where it's legal
- Use bitTorrent applications to download torrent files
- Automatically store installers offline to user storage
- Then *use* those offline installers on other similar mobile devices 
- Use a *fully-functional* "App Drawer" for rarely used apps

The ability to update the operating system is good, and I laud Apple for
updating many of their devices - but if the update doesn't contain the
things you want to do - what good is that update?

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

#31877

On Fri, 15 Jul 2016 13:09:54 -0700, Savageduck wrote:

> ...er, nope!
> I have Anker Lightning certified cables, because they are tougher and 
> more durable than the Apple and other third party cables.
> I also have and use an Anker charger because it is damn good.
> <https://www.anker.com/products/taxons/108/USB%20Chargers>

That's what I would have done too because that's a rational decision, based
on facts, and not on "image".

However, I've seen far too many posts here where someone chastises someone
else for not purchasing the Apple chargers, since Apple MARKETING has
convinced that person that *only* Apple chargers are safe.

Only slowly am I realizing why the bulk of the Apple Apologists here get so
defensive about their product.

It's because they never bought on price:performance in the first place.
You did, with your chargers - but many of them did not.

My growing realization of why the Apple Apologists here act the way they do
(which is far *different* than Unix or Windows or Android users), is simply
because they *never* bought on price performance.

They always bought on emotional image.

So, when price:performance issues come into question, they can't react any
way other than by lying outright (e.g., nospam's infamous "bullshit") or by
hiding the inconvenient truth (e.g., "how do you do it", and then "It's
easy", when it's actually impossible).

While you bought price:performance, they bought an "image".

Just as someone who paid $1000 for a Gucci handbag doesn't want to hear
that it's made out of plastic, my growing realization is that these Apple
Apologists can't stand when technical price:performance issues are brought
up with Apple equipment.

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

#31878

On Sat, 16 Jul 2016 04:21:15 +0000 (UTC), Aardvarks wrote:

> While you bought price:performance, they bought an "image".
> 
> Just as someone who paid $1000 for a Gucci handbag doesn't want to hear
> that it's made out of plastic, my growing realization is that these Apple
> Apologists can't stand when technical price:performance issues are brought
> up with Apple equipment.

In addition, I'm slowly realizing that the Apple Apologists are inherently
"herd animals".

It makes them feel good about themselves, in a safety way, to be *inside*
the walled garden, and, they revel in numbers such as the number of apps or
the number of iPhones sold.

What they find is safety in the herd.

I believe that's why they abhor when anyone is outside the herd, especially
if they interface to those horrid "non-supported" products. 

A. The Apple Apologists bought on *image* (not price:performance)
B. The Apple Apologist finds safety being a herd animal

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

#31890

On 07/15/2016 09:21 PM, Aardvarks wrote:

> Just as someone who paid $1000 for a Gucci handbag doesn't want to hear
> that it's made out of plastic, my growing realization is that these Apple
> Apologists can't stand when technical price:performance issues are brought
> up with Apple equipment.

The fact that such handbags, exactly the same as those ordered by Gucci 
(the factory made 5,000 and Gucci bought 4,000) are considered 
"counterfeit" is wrong.  Grey market, maybe, but certainly not 
counterfeit.  The fact that Gucci can sell a handbag for that much means 
that we're a lot dumber than we'd like to think we are.

When I was a kid t-shirts advertising a product were very nearly given 
away -- 3 boxtops and a self-addressed envelope or equivalent.  Now they 
cost more than plain ones.  People pay extra to advertise products?  See 
the last sentence in the paragraph above.

But I digress...

-- 
Cheers, Bev
     "Attention: All virgins report to Paradise immediately!!
      This is not a drill."                     --MWilliams

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

#31896

On 16/07/2016 07:05, The Real Bev wrote:
[]
> The fact that such handbags, exactly the same as those ordered by Gucci
> (the factory made 5,000 and Gucci bought 4,000) are considered
> "counterfeit" is wrong.  Grey market, maybe, but certainly not
> counterfeit.  The fact that Gucci can sell a handbag for that much means
> that we're a lot dumber than we'd like to think we are.
>
> When I was a kid t-shirts advertising a product were very nearly given
> away -- 3 boxtops and a self-addressed envelope or equivalent.  Now they
> cost more than plain ones.  People pay extra to advertise products?  See
> the last sentence in the paragraph above.
>
> But I digress...

.. whilst having made an excellent point!

-- 
Cheers,
David
Web: http://www.satsignal.eu

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

#31902

In article <nmciqs$afp$1@dont-email.me>, The Real Bev
<bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:

> 
> > Just as someone who paid $1000 for a Gucci handbag doesn't want to hear
> > that it's made out of plastic, my growing realization is that these Apple
> > Apologists can't stand when technical price:performance issues are brought
> > up with Apple equipment.
> 
> The fact that such handbags, exactly the same as those ordered by Gucci 
> (the factory made 5,000 and Gucci bought 4,000) are considered 
> "counterfeit" is wrong.  Grey market, maybe, but certainly not 
> counterfeit. 

nobody can be that stupid. there are definitely counterfeit gucci bags
as well as counterfeits of many other premium products. 

it's *not* excess inventory left over from a production run that
weren't bought (seriously, wtf). 

<http://www.ebay.com/gds/How-to-Spot-a-Fake-Gucci-Handbag-/1000000017768
9147/g.html>

> The fact that Gucci can sell a handbag for that much means 
> that we're a lot dumber than we'd like to think we are.

you certainly are.

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

#31912

On Fri, 15 Jul 2016 23:05:14 -0700, The Real Bev wrote:

> The fact that such handbags, exactly the same as those ordered by Gucci 
> (the factory made 5,000 and Gucci bought 4,000) are considered 
> "counterfeit" is wrong.  Grey market, maybe, but certainly not 
> counterfeit.  The fact that Gucci can sell a handbag for that much means 
> that we're a lot dumber than we'd like to think we are.

Exactly.

People who buy Gucci handbags almost certainly did not buy on pure
price:performance issues.

They bought on perceived image issues.

When I point out that a Coach handbag is better quality at a lower price,
the can scoff at the fact that it's not a Gucci handbag, but they can't
argue that the plastic is worse than the leather for most performance
reasons.

I have been perplexed by the Apple Apologists for years; so only slowly am
I realizing why they're so sensitive to truthful performance comparisons.

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

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

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

csiph-web