Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #92056 > unrolled thread
| Started by | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2026-09-24 01:42 -0400 |
| Last post | 2026-09-26 01:54 -0400 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 100 — 13 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc
Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-24 01:42 -0400
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-09-24 10:33 +0100
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-24 11:53 +0100
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-09-25 03:43 +0000
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-26 00:08 -0400
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-26 09:31 +0100
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-09-26 10:01 +0000
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-26 12:04 +0100
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-26 21:39 -0400
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-26 21:32 -0400
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-27 07:59 +0100
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-27 03:16 -0400
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-27 08:38 +0100
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-09-27 19:02 +0000
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-28 08:58 +0100
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-09-28 17:33 +0000
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-29 03:25 -0400
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-01 01:37 -0400
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-02 01:39 -0400
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-02 11:47 +0200
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-02 12:10 +0100
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-02 19:57 +0200
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-03 03:13 +0000
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-03 02:07 -0400
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-03 08:47 +0100
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-03 04:04 -0400
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-03 20:15 +0000
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-03 23:53 -0400
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-04 04:29 +0000
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-04 02:03 -0400
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-04 19:10 +0000
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-05 09:56 +0100
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-03 01:58 -0400
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-02 19:34 +0000
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-02 20:40 +0100
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-02 21:25 -0400
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-02 21:18 -0400
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-03 05:00 +0000
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-03 02:13 -0400
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-03 09:17 +0000
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-03 11:51 +0100
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-03 13:22 +0200
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-03 23:28 -0400
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-04 12:57 +0200
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-04 18:55 +0000
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-05 09:32 +0100
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-05 19:31 +0000
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-05 02:31 -0400
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-05 14:42 +0200
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-03 20:05 +0000
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-03 08:46 +0100
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-03 03:59 -0400
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-03 13:37 +0200
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-03 20:07 +0000
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-04 13:00 +0200
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-04 18:23 +0000
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-03 13:20 +0200
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-03 13:36 +0200
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System Lars Poulsen <lars@beagle-ears.com> - 2026-10-02 06:33 -0700
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-03 01:52 -0400
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-03 20:12 +0000
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System Lars Poulsen <lars@beagle-ears.com> - 2026-10-03 17:23 -0700
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-04 03:53 +0000
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-04 00:04 -0400
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-04 04:19 +0000
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System Lars Poulsen <lars@beagle-ears.com> - 2026-10-04 13:46 -0700
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2026-10-05 02:52 +0000
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-05 03:49 -0400
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-05 19:26 +0000
[OT] Ex-Nokia HMD feature phones (was: Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System) Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-07 10:22 +0100
Re: [OT] Ex-Nokia HMD feature phones (was: Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-07 18:21 +0000
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-05 23:20 +0000
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-06 01:56 +0000
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-07 01:29 -0400
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-10-08 14:22 +0000
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-08 20:28 +0000
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-09 02:34 -0400
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2026-10-09 17:38 +0000
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-07 10:23 +0100
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-07 01:10 -0400
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-07 17:28 +0100
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-08 04:06 -0400
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-08 09:45 +0100
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-10-09 14:40 +0000
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-11 00:50 -0400
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-04 03:36 -0400
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-03 23:47 -0400
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-04 04:34 +0000
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-04 02:14 -0400
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-04 19:06 +0000
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-05 01:35 +0100
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-05 09:47 +0100
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System Lars Poulsen <lars@beagle-ears.com> - 2026-09-27 06:53 -0700
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-202609.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2026-09-26 17:05 +0200
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-09-26 20:00 +0000
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-24 11:43 +0100
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-09-25 03:50 +0000
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-25 09:11 +0100
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-25 12:28 +0200
Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-26 01:54 -0400
Page 4 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 Next page →
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-03 20:12 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nid5u7Foo9pU8@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #92715 |
On Sat, 3 Oct 2026 01:52:57 -0400, c186282 wrote: > Still looking to buy an actual 'smartphone', just in case. Expect it > to sit on a shelf 99.9% of the time. One of the medium-priced Samsung > 'A' series, > A-37 is well reviewed, look to be what I need. THINK I'm gonna get it > thru "Consumer Cellular" - alt provider - > good prices and ASSUME you're older so you won't be using megatons of > data. The Samsung A16 works fine for me. I think the latest is now the A17. I use Mint Mobile which is an inexpensive prepaid plan. T-Mobile bought them recently although they always used the T-Mobile network. It's 5 GB/mo for data but I've never come close to that.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lars Poulsen <lars@beagle-ears.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-03 17:23 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <119s6a8$3fkuv$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #92779 |
On 10/3/2026 13:12, rbowman wrote: > On Sat, 3 Oct 2026 01:52:57 -0400, c186282 wrote: > >> Still looking to buy an actual 'smartphone', just in case. Expect it >> to sit on a shelf 99.9% of the time. One of the medium-priced Samsung >> 'A' series, >> A-37 is well reviewed, look to be what I need. THINK I'm gonna get it >> thru "Consumer Cellular" - alt provider - >> good prices and ASSUME you're older so you won't be using megatons of >> data. > > The Samsung A16 works fine for me. I think the latest is now the A17. I > use Mint Mobile which is an inexpensive prepaid plan. T-Mobile bought them > recently although they always used the T-Mobile network. It's 5 GB/mo for > data but I've never come close to that. Now that both my wife and I have our iPhones on T-Mobile, I wonder what is the best cheap virtual carrier that does NOT use T-Mobile airwaves? I like to have a spare Android phone to use when the main system is down. Although AT&T has the best coverage in town, we left them because of poor customer service, and independent of that, a couple of years ago, their network in our part of town was down for THREE DAYS. -- Lars Poulsen - an old geek in Santa Barbara, California
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-04 03:53 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nie0tjFoo9pU10@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #92782 |
On Sat, 3 Oct 2026 17:23:34 -0700, Lars Poulsen wrote: > Now that both my wife and I have our iPhones on T-Mobile, I wonder what > is the best cheap virtual carrier that does NOT use T-Mobile airwaves? > I like to have a spare Android phone to use when the main system is > down. Although AT&T has the best coverage in town, we left them because > of poor customer service, and independent of that, a couple of years > ago, their network in our part of town was down for THREE DAYS. I had TracFone for years but switched to Mint when I went to 4G. Since then Verizon has bought TracFone. Verizon seems to have a number of virtual plans but the cheapest I see is $20/mo. Mint is $15/mo with 6 GB of data. Not a huge difference. Back when I went with Mint Verizon didn't have any similar plans. Today I'd probably go with one of theirs since coverage is a little better here. I'm not sure why Verizon and T-Mobile bought the virtual carriers and kept the plans rather than offering a similar deal to start with.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-04 00:04 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <wrKcnQ-TqpnJTVz3nZ2dnZfqn_ednZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #92791 |
On 10/3/26 23:53, rbowman wrote: > On Sat, 3 Oct 2026 17:23:34 -0700, Lars Poulsen wrote: > >> Now that both my wife and I have our iPhones on T-Mobile, I wonder what >> is the best cheap virtual carrier that does NOT use T-Mobile airwaves? >> I like to have a spare Android phone to use when the main system is >> down. Although AT&T has the best coverage in town, we left them because >> of poor customer service, and independent of that, a couple of years >> ago, their network in our part of town was down for THREE DAYS. > > I had TracFone for years but switched to Mint when I went to 4G. Since > then Verizon has bought TracFone. Verizon seems to have a number of > virtual plans but the cheapest I see is $20/mo. Mint is $15/mo with 6 GB > of data. Not a huge difference. Back when I went with Mint Verizon didn't > have any similar plans. Today I'd probably go with one of theirs since > coverage is a little better here. > > I'm not sure why Verizon and T-Mobile bought the virtual carriers and kept > the plans rather than offering a similar deal to start with. $$$ I did have a TracPhone for awhile, but it was 2G. Convenient though, you'd just buy a card at the convenience store and enter the magic number. TRIED a TracPhone 'smart' phone - but could barely get reception even if I walked out into the yard. It's still in a little tin box somewhere ...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-04 04:19 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nie2eqFoo9pU13@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #92793 |
On Sun, 4 Oct 2026 00:04:35 -0400, c186282 wrote: > I did have a TracPhone for awhile, but it was 2G. > Convenient though, you'd just buy a card at the convenience store and > enter the magic number. iirc the magic number was more like 40 hex values. More fun than IPv6. TracFone was owned by América Móvil, so it was no surprise that customer service was south of the border. Remember Carlos Slim?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lars Poulsen <lars@beagle-ears.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-04 13:46 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <119udv6$8ubd$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #92791 |
On 10/3/2026 20:53, rbowman wrote: > On Sat, 3 Oct 2026 17:23:34 -0700, Lars Poulsen wrote: > >> Now that both my wife and I have our iPhones on T-Mobile, I wonder what >> is the best cheap virtual carrier that does NOT use T-Mobile airwaves? >> I like to have a spare Android phone to use when the main system is >> down. Although AT&T has the best coverage in town, we left them because >> of poor customer service, and independent of that, a couple of years >> ago, their network in our part of town was down for THREE DAYS. > > I had TracFone for years but switched to Mint when I went to 4G. Since > then Verizon has bought TracFone. Verizon seems to have a number of > virtual plans but the cheapest I see is $20/mo. Mint is $15/mo with 6 GB > of data. Not a huge difference. Back when I went with Mint Verizon didn't > have any similar plans. Today I'd probably go with one of theirs since > coverage is a little better here. > > I'm not sure why Verizon and T-Mobile bought the virtual carriers and kept > the plans rather than offering a similar deal to start with. Around here, only the homeless use TracFone. The phones are shit, the coverage is marginal and of course there is no service. The phones are tied hard to TracFone and cannot be unlocked. AFAICS, Mint is T-Mobile. Fourth-tier access priority, behind "5G Unlimited", "T-Mobile Basic 55+" and "Metro by T-Mobile" prepaid customers. So who else OTHER than T-Mobile captives are in that discount space? Is Consumer Cellular still AT&T? -- Lars Poulsen - an old geek in Santa Barbara, California
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-05 02:52 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrn11c647r.hk6.spamtrap42@one.localnet> |
| In reply to | #92872 |
On 2026-10-04, Lars Poulsen <lars@beagle-ears.com> wrote: > On 10/3/2026 20:53, rbowman wrote: >> On Sat, 3 Oct 2026 17:23:34 -0700, Lars Poulsen wrote: >> >>> Now that both my wife and I have our iPhones on T-Mobile, I wonder what >>> is the best cheap virtual carrier that does NOT use T-Mobile airwaves? >>> I like to have a spare Android phone to use when the main system is >>> down. Although AT&T has the best coverage in town, we left them because >>> of poor customer service, and independent of that, a couple of years >>> ago, their network in our part of town was down for THREE DAYS. >> >> I had TracFone for years but switched to Mint when I went to 4G. Since >> then Verizon has bought TracFone. Verizon seems to have a number of >> virtual plans but the cheapest I see is $20/mo. Mint is $15/mo with 6 GB >> of data. Not a huge difference. Back when I went with Mint Verizon didn't >> have any similar plans. Today I'd probably go with one of theirs since >> coverage is a little better here. >> >> I'm not sure why Verizon and T-Mobile bought the virtual carriers and kept >> the plans rather than offering a similar deal to start with. > > Around here, only the homeless use TracFone. The phones are shit, the > coverage is marginal and of course there is no service. > The phones are tied hard to TracFone and cannot be unlocked. > > AFAICS, Mint is T-Mobile. Fourth-tier access priority, behind "5G > Unlimited", "T-Mobile Basic 55+" and "Metro by T-Mobile" prepaid customers. > > So who else OTHER than T-Mobile captives are in that discount space? > Is Consumer Cellular still AT&T? You're definitely right about TracFone customer service (and technical support) being terrible. However, it is possible to buy an unlocked phone elsewhere, then buy a SIM from TracFone. Last I checked, for the SIM, the customer gets to choose between the three back-end networks. However, with IIRC TracFone now being owned by Verizon, that might change. When I switched from TracFone-locked Alcatel flip phones to Schok Classic Flip phones plus a TracFone SIM, one of the lines took 5 hours for "support" to get voice minutes, SMS/text, and data all transferred correctly. When one Schok phone broke, the TracFone agent said I would have to buy a new SIM for the new phone and go through the same process to move the number/service/account to the new SIM. Instead, I moved the old SIM to the new phone, and everything worked perfectly. Of course, I practiced ESD safety when moving the SIM. IIUC, Schok has basically quit selling their flip phone, so I'll eventually need to switch to Alcatel, Nokia, or other unlocked flip phone. IIUC, I _should_ be able to simply move the SIMs to the new phones, even with the phones being different. -- Robert Riches spamtrap42@jacob21819.net (Yes, that is one of my email addresses.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-05 03:49 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <QOKdnfaWqNgSy173nZ2dnZfqn_qdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #92886 |
On 10/4/26 22:52, Robert Riches wrote: > On 2026-10-04, Lars Poulsen <lars@beagle-ears.com> wrote: >> On 10/3/2026 20:53, rbowman wrote: >>> On Sat, 3 Oct 2026 17:23:34 -0700, Lars Poulsen wrote: >>> >>>> Now that both my wife and I have our iPhones on T-Mobile, I wonder what >>>> is the best cheap virtual carrier that does NOT use T-Mobile airwaves? >>>> I like to have a spare Android phone to use when the main system is >>>> down. Although AT&T has the best coverage in town, we left them because >>>> of poor customer service, and independent of that, a couple of years >>>> ago, their network in our part of town was down for THREE DAYS. >>> >>> I had TracFone for years but switched to Mint when I went to 4G. Since >>> then Verizon has bought TracFone. Verizon seems to have a number of >>> virtual plans but the cheapest I see is $20/mo. Mint is $15/mo with 6 GB >>> of data. Not a huge difference. Back when I went with Mint Verizon didn't >>> have any similar plans. Today I'd probably go with one of theirs since >>> coverage is a little better here. >>> >>> I'm not sure why Verizon and T-Mobile bought the virtual carriers and kept >>> the plans rather than offering a similar deal to start with. >> >> Around here, only the homeless use TracFone. The phones are shit, the >> coverage is marginal and of course there is no service. >> The phones are tied hard to TracFone and cannot be unlocked. >> >> AFAICS, Mint is T-Mobile. Fourth-tier access priority, behind "5G >> Unlimited", "T-Mobile Basic 55+" and "Metro by T-Mobile" prepaid customers. >> >> So who else OTHER than T-Mobile captives are in that discount space? >> Is Consumer Cellular still AT&T? > > You're definitely right about TracFone customer service (and > technical support) being terrible. However, it is possible to > buy an unlocked phone elsewhere, then buy a SIM from TracFone. > Last I checked, for the SIM, the customer gets to choose between > the three back-end networks. However, with IIRC TracFone now > being owned by Verizon, that might change. > > When I switched from TracFone-locked Alcatel flip phones to Schok > Classic Flip phones plus a TracFone SIM, one of the lines took 5 > hours for "support" to get voice minutes, SMS/text, and data all > transferred correctly. When one Schok phone broke, the TracFone > agent said I would have to buy a new SIM for the new phone and go > through the same process to move the number/service/account to > the new SIM. Instead, I moved the old SIM to the new phone, and > everything worked perfectly. Of course, I practiced ESD safety > when moving the SIM. > > IIUC, Schok has basically quit selling their flip phone, so I'll > eventually need to switch to Alcatel, Nokia, or other unlocked > flip phone. IIUC, I _should_ be able to simply move the SIMs to > the new phones, even with the phones being different. Nokia still sells semi-decent flips - and they take a real SIM card you can move around. KEYS go a bit wonky after awhile though. Have one spare left. May buy one more ... DO like flips. There is no 'perfect' carrier. They all cut corners here and there. ATT, in the USA, still has the best overall coverage. Many of the others piggyback on the same antennas, but maybe at a lower data priority. Alas ATT support often sucks. So, well, add it all up and PICK YER POISON. Hmm ... does Musk have "StarPhone" yet ? I see : https://starlink.com/business/mobile https://elonbuzz.com/elon-musks-pi-phone-starlink-2025-finally-here/ but not a ton of believable consumer reviews yet. Anyway, an old old-school guy. DON'T play games, NOT gonna be streaming 8K on a fuckin' little phone (what's the POINT other than ego ?). As such I can get by on rather LOW 'data' and be very very happy. StarLink-related MAY be The Future for quite awhile. Wires and relays and towers are now becoming Too Expensive. Elon has the alt. But I still want to see a lot more real customer reviews listing all the positives and negatives. Oh, ALL carriers - the ability to easily, smoothly, MIGRATE yer existing numbers is a HIGH priority. Most everything uses 2FA these days - GOTTA keep consistent contact numbers. This is one reason I went with the mentioned "phone-advanced" system. (note 'phone-advanced' does NOT seem to accept TEXTS in any fashion, even though it's a KIND of "cell")
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-05 19:26 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <niic01Foo9pU40@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #92906 |
On Mon, 5 Oct 2026 03:49:30 -0400, c186282 wrote: > Nokia still sells semi-decent flips - and they take a real SIM card > you can move around. KEYS go a bit wonky after awhile though. Have > one spare left. May buy one more ... DO like flips. In the US that must be NOS. HMD, who bought the rights back from Microsoft for the Nokia name but dropped out of the US market last year. I liked my Nokia 4.2 but went with Samsung when I couldn't find a Nokia. Amazon has a international candybar type that is GSM.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-07 10:22 +0100 |
| Subject | [OT] Ex-Nokia HMD feature phones (was: Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System) |
| Message-ID | <11a5302$2msl7$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #92964 |
On 2026-10-05, rbowman wrote: > On Mon, 5 Oct 2026 03:49:30 -0400, c186282 wrote: > >> Nokia still sells semi-decent flips - and they take a real SIM card >> you can move around. KEYS go a bit wonky after awhile though. Have >> one spare left. May buy one more ... DO like flips. > > In the US that must be NOS. HMD, who bought the rights back from Microsoft > for the Nokia name but dropped out of the US market last year. I liked my > Nokia 4.2 but went with Samsung when I couldn't find a Nokia. Amazon has a > international candybar type that is GSM. A couple years ago, reading through reviews, it seemed that HMD phones were a bit worse than Nokia in the OS department, has that improved? I don't mean stuff like Android, or even Symbian (would be nice to have that segment back too, though), but e.g. Series 40. -- Nuno Silva
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-07 18:21 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Ex-Nokia HMD feature phones (was: Re: Micro-Review "ATT Home-Advanced" System) |
| Message-ID | <ningsqFsfnjU9@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #93093 |
On Wed, 07 Oct 2026 10:22:10 +0100, Nuno Silva wrote: > On 2026-10-05, rbowman wrote: > >> On Mon, 5 Oct 2026 03:49:30 -0400, c186282 wrote: >> >>> Nokia still sells semi-decent flips - and they take a real SIM card >>> you can move around. KEYS go a bit wonky after awhile though. Have >>> one spare left. May buy one more ... DO like flips. >> >> In the US that must be NOS. HMD, who bought the rights back from >> Microsoft for the Nokia name but dropped out of the US market last >> year. I liked my Nokia 4.2 but went with Samsung when I couldn't find a >> Nokia. Amazon has a international candybar type that is GSM. > > A couple years ago, reading through reviews, it seemed that HMD phones > were a bit worse than Nokia in the OS department, has that improved? > > I don't mean stuff like Android, or even Symbian (would be nice to have > that segment back too, though), but e.g. Series 40. My Nokia had Android One. It worked and was pretty clean. My current Samsung has a lot of Samsung apps over and above the standard Android load. I use Samsung Music to play the mp3s I've loaded. There was also a Samsung app I loaded on the Nokia that transferred the apps on it to the new phone that was handy. Most of the others like Samsung Health are of no use to me.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-05 23:20 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ghWwS.8351$ITPb.6820@fx05.iad> |
| In reply to | #92906 |
On 2026-10-05, c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote: > On 10/4/26 22:52, Robert Riches wrote: > >> IIUC, Schok has basically quit selling their flip phone, so I'll >> eventually need to switch to Alcatel, Nokia, or other unlocked >> flip phone. IIUC, I _should_ be able to simply move the SIMs to >> the new phones, even with the phones being different. > > Nokia still sells semi-decent flips - and they > take a real SIM card you can move around. KEYS go > a bit wonky after awhile though. Have one spare > left. May buy one more ... DO like flips. My latest flip phone is from TCL. I didn't care whether my carrier claimed to support it or not - I just moved my SIM card over and it worked. All I need is the ability to send and receive calls and texts (although the calender is good to have too), and it does that just fine. It can even send and receive pictures in text messages. It's good enough for me. -- /~\ Charlie Gibbs | In this world there are \ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | two kinds of people: X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | 1. Those who can extrapolate / \ if you read it the right way. | from incomplete data.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-06 01:56 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nij2q5Foo9pU48@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #92978 |
On Mon, 05 Oct 2026 23:20:44 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > My latest flip phone is from TCL. I didn't care whether my carrier > claimed to support it or not - I just moved my SIM card over and it > worked. All I need is the ability to send and receive calls and texts > (although the calender is good to have too), and it does that just fine. > It can even send and receive pictures in text messages. It's good > enough for me. TCL seems to be associated with Cricket although Amazon has unlocked flips that say than can work on Verizon/T-Mobile. I have several apps like Seek (identify plants and animals), Zepp (Amazfit fitness watch), and Geocaching that I use much more than actual phone stuff.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-07 01:29 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <XuucnWrcBadbRVj3nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #92987 |
On 10/5/26 21:56, rbowman wrote: > On Mon, 05 Oct 2026 23:20:44 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > >> My latest flip phone is from TCL. I didn't care whether my carrier >> claimed to support it or not - I just moved my SIM card over and it >> worked. All I need is the ability to send and receive calls and texts >> (although the calender is good to have too), and it does that just fine. >> It can even send and receive pictures in text messages. It's good >> enough for me. > > TCL seems to be associated with Cricket although Amazon has unlocked flips > that say than can work on Verizon/T-Mobile. I have several apps like Seek > (identify plants and animals), Zepp (Amazfit fitness watch), and > Geocaching that I use much more than actual phone stuff. "Unlocked" is good ... and Amazon prices are pretty good. But getting any specific provider to link-in TO that phone might be rather complex. THEY want to sell you a phone, at double or triple price, and would rather you DON'T keep the good old number you NEED for 2FA and such. Hey, think, what if all yer 2FA with banks and govt and such suddenly didn't work ? Anyway, the micro-review, now TWELVE were able to dial in. ELEVEN were POLITICAL SURVEYS :-) But, still need that number as a 2nd 2FA contact. Can't even log in to my SSA/MediCare acct now, WAS easy just a couple years ago. May have to physically GO to the nearest (?) physical office and try to fix it. Should I bring my lawyer too ??? Will they want two or three kinds of photo-ID ? I only have one and NO idea how/where to get more they'd like, DID find a very old official BCert copy in the back of my Mom's old file drawer. But where I was actually born was 200 miles from where I've lived since. Would I have to go 200 miles to get a valid new copy ??? Not so good at my age. Likely three or four days in a motel or something too at Point Of Origin. They'll demand 'X' on the first visit, then 'Y' on the next and 'Z' on the next. They WANT to DUMP you now, STEAL all your hard-paid money. Maybe time for big class-action lawsuits and injunctions ........ But hey, UK is even *worse* now ... by the news a very clear campaign to FUCK everyone near/past pension age. Gotta pay-off the beloved 'immigrants' after all ...... UK is going *down* - hard and SOON. The locals now don't DARE complain, don't DARE rock the boat. Terrorized/enslaved.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rich <rich@example.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-08 14:22 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <11a88v7$3sq6e$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #93076 |
c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote: > On 10/5/26 21:56, rbowman wrote: >> On Mon, 05 Oct 2026 23:20:44 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote: >> >>> My latest flip phone is from TCL. I didn't care whether my carrier >>> claimed to support it or not - I just moved my SIM card over and it >>> worked. All I need is the ability to send and receive calls and >>> texts (although the calender is good to have too), and it does that >>> just fine. It can even send and receive pictures in text messages. >>> It's good enough for me. >> >> TCL seems to be associated with Cricket although Amazon has unlocked >> flips that say than can work on Verizon/T-Mobile. I have several >> apps like Seek (identify plants and animals), Zepp (Amazfit fitness >> watch), and Geocaching that I use much more than actual phone stuff. > > "Unlocked" is good ... and Amazon prices are pretty good. But > getting any specific provider to link-in TO that phone might be > rather complex. THEY want to sell you a phone, at double or triple > price, and would rather you DON'T keep the good old number you NEED > for 2FA and such. "Always-wrong" wrong yet again with anchient hallucinated data (at least for the USA). The providers very much *do* want to sell you a phone, but they can't legally deny you use of your unlocked phone. The difficult part is often getting the phone droid (or shop droid if in a store) off their "sell new phone" script and onto the "need a sim card" script. But that's just the marketing department being standard lying marketers. They also have not been able to prevent you from keeping the old number since sometime circa 2002 or thereabouts. Again, the "hard sell script" might be setup to PT Barnum the unwary into giving up the old number, but that has not been the actual reality for at least twenty-four or so years now. The only reason one can't move "current phone" to "new carrier" is if "current phone" actually lacks the radios for the bands "new carrier" uses for their network. And that is a physical hardware limitation of the particular model, not anything imposed by the carrier on the model. If the new carrier uses an 800Mhz band, and your phone hardware lacks an 800Mhz radio, it can't hear the towers and it can't talk to the towers. Now, I would not put it past the marketing department to setup the droid's scripts to /imply/ that every old phone they see lacks the appropriate radio to PT Barnum up more sales, but if you have done a little bit of homework to check radio compatibility, that again is just getting the droid derailed and off onto the right script.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-08 20:28 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <niqcmpFp2dnU4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #93180 |
On Thu, 8 Oct 2026 14:22:31 -0000 (UTC), Rich wrote: > The providers very much *do* want to sell you a phone, but they can't > legally deny you use of your unlocked phone. The difficult part is > often getting the phone droid (or shop droid if in a store) off their > "sell new phone" script and onto the "need a sim card" script. But > that's just the marketing department being standard lying marketers. I was pleased when I went to the Verizon store to cancel my data only plan it took about 5 minutes with no attempt to sell me anything. I got the Nokia via Amazon but their price for the Samsung A16 was the same as BestBuy. BestBuy is next to the gym so I went for immediate gratification.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-09 02:34 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <jjydnQzdHJF5F1X3nZ2dnZfqnPadnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #93180 |
On 10/8/26 10:22, Rich wrote: > c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote: >> On 10/5/26 21:56, rbowman wrote: >>> On Mon, 05 Oct 2026 23:20:44 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote: >>> >>>> My latest flip phone is from TCL. I didn't care whether my carrier >>>> claimed to support it or not - I just moved my SIM card over and it >>>> worked. All I need is the ability to send and receive calls and >>>> texts (although the calender is good to have too), and it does that >>>> just fine. It can even send and receive pictures in text messages. >>>> It's good enough for me. >>> >>> TCL seems to be associated with Cricket although Amazon has unlocked >>> flips that say than can work on Verizon/T-Mobile. I have several >>> apps like Seek (identify plants and animals), Zepp (Amazfit fitness >>> watch), and Geocaching that I use much more than actual phone stuff. >> >> "Unlocked" is good ... and Amazon prices are pretty good. But >> getting any specific provider to link-in TO that phone might be >> rather complex. THEY want to sell you a phone, at double or triple >> price, and would rather you DON'T keep the good old number you NEED >> for 2FA and such. > > "Always-wrong" wrong yet again with anchient hallucinated data (at > least for the USA). Ah, Lord Superior-To-Everyone ........ My flip uses "KaiOS" - kinda specific for ATT. Doubt it'd work right with a hostile carrier. > The providers very much *do* want to sell you a phone, but they can't > legally deny you use of your unlocked phone. Mine IS kinda 'locked'. I could sell them the phone number, but would surely have to buy a whole new device. As usual, the Devil is in the fine details. Yes, you CAN get there from here, but expect to spend a lot of $$$ and things will be fucked up for a long time too ....
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-09 17:38 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrn11ci9js.s3l.spamtrap42@one.localnet> |
| In reply to | #93230 |
On 2026-10-09, c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote: > On 10/8/26 10:22, Rich wrote: >> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote: >>> On 10/5/26 21:56, rbowman wrote: >>>> On Mon, 05 Oct 2026 23:20:44 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote: >>>> >>>>> My latest flip phone is from TCL. I didn't care whether my carrier >>>>> claimed to support it or not - I just moved my SIM card over and it >>>>> worked. All I need is the ability to send and receive calls and >>>>> texts (although the calender is good to have too), and it does that >>>>> just fine. It can even send and receive pictures in text messages. >>>>> It's good enough for me. >>>> >>>> TCL seems to be associated with Cricket although Amazon has unlocked >>>> flips that say than can work on Verizon/T-Mobile. I have several >>>> apps like Seek (identify plants and animals), Zepp (Amazfit fitness >>>> watch), and Geocaching that I use much more than actual phone stuff. >>> >>> "Unlocked" is good ... and Amazon prices are pretty good. But >>> getting any specific provider to link-in TO that phone might be >>> rather complex. THEY want to sell you a phone, at double or triple >>> price, and would rather you DON'T keep the good old number you NEED >>> for 2FA and such. >> >> "Always-wrong" wrong yet again with anchient hallucinated data (at >> least for the USA). > > Ah, Lord Superior-To-Everyone ........ > > My flip uses "KaiOS" - kinda specific for ATT. > Doubt it'd work right with a hostile carrier. KaiOS is not specific to ATT. It comes (or came) standard on the Alcatel flip phones I used in years past. -- Robert Riches spamtrap42@jacob21819.net (Yes, that is one of my email addresses.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-07 10:23 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <11a532b$2msl7$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #92987 |
On 2026-10-06, rbowman wrote: > On Mon, 05 Oct 2026 23:20:44 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > >> My latest flip phone is from TCL. I didn't care whether my carrier >> claimed to support it or not - I just moved my SIM card over and it >> worked. All I need is the ability to send and receive calls and texts >> (although the calender is good to have too), and it does that just fine. >> It can even send and receive pictures in text messages. It's good >> enough for me. > > TCL seems to be associated with Cricket although Amazon has unlocked flips > that say than can work on Verizon/T-Mobile. I have several apps like Seek > (identify plants and animals), Zepp (Amazfit fitness watch), and > Geocaching that I use much more than actual phone stuff. Isn't TCL the new brand for what used to be Alcatel phones? -- Nuno Silva
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-07 01:10 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <XuucnWvcBafBSVj3nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #92978 |
On 10/5/26 19:20, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > On 2026-10-05, c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote: > >> On 10/4/26 22:52, Robert Riches wrote: >> >>> IIUC, Schok has basically quit selling their flip phone, so I'll >>> eventually need to switch to Alcatel, Nokia, or other unlocked >>> flip phone. IIUC, I _should_ be able to simply move the SIMs to >>> the new phones, even with the phones being different. >> >> Nokia still sells semi-decent flips - and they >> take a real SIM card you can move around. KEYS go >> a bit wonky after awhile though. Have one spare >> left. May buy one more ... DO like flips. > > My latest flip phone is from TCL. I didn't care whether my > carrier claimed to support it or not - I just moved my SIM > card over and it worked. All I need is the ability to send > and receive calls and texts (although the calender is good > to have too), and it does that just fine. It can even send > and receive pictures in text messages. It's good enough for me. More and more seem to be using "E-Sims" these days, basically yer prime provider holding you hostage. For normal daily carry-around uses - voice and basic texts - a little flip does it just fine, in a small package, for cheap. I might buy a 'real' smartphone soon, but gonna KEEP my flip. The 'real' phone will just sit on a shelf 99.99% of the time. Will find a timer thing to give it a little charge about once a week. What kinda scares me is the latter gens and their expensive "smart" devices ... seem to become their entire worlds - and the providers CHARGE BIG for that too. Whole idea, but the larger sociological impacts are looking kind of severe and getting worse fast with 'AI'. I do know how to hitch a horse to a basic plow to make survival food ... but how many others NOW do ? Ten or twenty years from now ??? If the phone/AI goes all to shit for whatever reasons we're looking at at least a 90% die-off REALLY FAST. That might not be enough to 'carry on' and it's back to the darkest ages. Oh well, sacrifice a bunch of virgins and everything will be fine ....
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc
csiph-web