Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > misc.phone.mobile.iphone > #118358
| From | Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | misc.phone.mobile.iphone, alt.os.linux, alt.privacy.anon-server, comp.mobile.android |
| Subject | Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy |
| Date | 2019-02-09 16:23 +0000 |
| Organization | NOYB |
| Message-ID | <q3n2ah.8ic.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | (5 earlier) <q3id24$bgf$1@dont-email.me> <q3ifpv$nv1$2@dont-email.me> <q3jcg8$mrg$1@dont-email.me> <q3kmng.eq0.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net> <q3ks79$k04$2@dont-email.me> |
Cross-posted to 4 groups.
William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote:
> On 2019-02-08, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
> > Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote:
> >> > On 2019-02-07, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> J.O. Aho <user@example.net> wrote:
> >> >>> On 2/6/19 5:24 PM, William Unruh wrote:
> >> >>>> On 2019-02-06, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>>>> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> >> >>>>>> In article <q3dlkf$e4a$1@news.neodome.i2p>, <anon@anon.com> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> Apparently, we will have it in April 2019. Anyone planning
> >> >>>>>>> to buy one?
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> https://puri.sm/products/librem-5/
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> dead on arrival. no carrier support, no apps and numerous
> >> >>>>>> false claims.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Carrier support isn't required. Just pop a SIM in and you're
> >> >>>>> good to go.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Of course it is. The phone has to operate on the frequency/type band
> >> >>>> that the carrier operates on.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> In most countries, including US, there is an standard for the
> >> >>> whole nation (the only exception I can think of is China), so
> >> >>> there is little need for traditional carrier support.
> >> >>> Sure if you can get carriers to promote the phone, that would
> >> >>> help.
> >> >>
> >> >> Yep. In the uk i can buy any retail phone and it'll work on any network.
> >> >> There are some exceptions with 2G phones or grey imports.
> >> >
> >> > a) that is because in the UK., they want to sell phones to everyone, and
> >> > so make sure they support UK phones. Then you go to Spain or Maroco, or
> >> > USA and find your phone is as useful as brick.
> >>
> >> You know, the concept of travel has not escaped the notice of phone
> >> manufacturers. I have been to all those countries with no ill effects.
> >
> > Well, of late, Mr.Unruh has uttered some ... hmmm ... 'special'
> > opinions, so we probably shouldn't pay too much attention to this
> > uninformed rant either, especially considering his other/further
> > uninformed/misinformed responses in this thread.
> >
> > Note to self: Must remind myself that - according to Mr.Unruh - my phone
> > does *not* work all over Europe, the US, Australia, Singapore, etc..
> > Likewise, I shouldn't accept any mobile calls from someone in the US,
> > pretending to be my son.
>
> I never said that.
What you said - and what Chris and I responded to - is this uninformed
rant:
[Rewind/repeat:]
> >> > a) that is because in the UK., they want to sell phones to everyone, and
> >> > so make sure they support UK phones. Then you go to Spain or Maroco, or
> >> > USA and find your phone is as useful as brick.
That's non-sense (except for the US bit, if you're an *uninformed*
customer).
> What I said was that your phone must have support for
> the bands in use or it does not work.
Yes, your other responses were a bit better, but still had way too
much FUD, incorrect terminology (GSM3, GSM4, GSM5), etc..
> There are about 40 bands around
> the world for 3G and 4G, and most phones do NOT cover them all.
LTE ('4G') indeed has many bands, but you can easily get a phone which
covers most if not all UMTS ('3G') bands. For most people, for
traveling, 3G is fine.
> For 2G
> it was much better, as there were only 4 bands, but even there you had
> to make sure you got an "international" phone which covered all 4. (many
> only covered 2, and either worked in the UK or in the US but not both)
> Unfotunately 2G is being phased out. Many of the US companies have
> already done so.
Most informed people had no problem getting the right 2G phone for
traveling.
But I guess many people with smartphones are not so smart themselves,
so they run into all kind of trouble when traveling unprepared. Getting
a correct/comptible phone is no different than all the other
travel-related aspects, such as power, plugs, currency, travel
documents, etc., etc., ad infinitum.
Back to misc.phone.mobile.iphone | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy <anon@anon.com> - 2019-02-06 03:52 +0000
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-05 23:25 -0500
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2019-02-06 08:45 +0000
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-06 10:43 -0500
Re: PureOS and Librem laptops <anon@anon.com> - 2019-02-07 22:39 +0000
Re: PureOS and Librem laptops nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-07 22:47 -0500
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2019-02-06 16:24 +0000
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy "J.O. Aho" <user@example.net> - 2019-02-07 21:43 +0100
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2019-02-07 22:56 +0000
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2019-02-07 23:42 +0000
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2019-02-08 07:52 +0000
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2019-02-08 02:59 -0600
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2019-02-08 13:13 +0100
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2019-02-08 18:53 +0000
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2019-02-08 21:27 +0000
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2019-02-09 16:23 +0000
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2019-02-09 17:28 +0000
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy Anonymous <anonymous@hoi-polloi.org> - 2019-02-09 19:01 +0100
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2019-02-09 18:25 +0000
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2019-02-09 18:43 +0000
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2019-02-09 19:53 +0000
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> - 2019-02-10 08:38 -0800
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2019-02-08 21:22 +0000
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2019-02-09 15:03 +0000
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2019-02-09 17:18 +0000
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2019-02-09 17:40 +0000
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2019-02-09 18:13 +0000
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> - 2019-02-10 08:39 -0800
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2019-02-11 22:51 +0000
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2019-02-09 17:24 +0000
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2019-02-09 17:38 +0000
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2019-02-09 17:53 +0000
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2019-02-09 18:09 +0000
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2019-02-09 20:12 +0000
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2019-02-09 23:34 +0100
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2019-02-10 00:55 +0100
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2019-02-09 18:57 +0100
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2019-02-07 23:40 +0000
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy "J.O. Aho" <user@example.net> - 2019-02-08 06:51 +0100
Re: PureOS and Librem laptops <anon@anon.com> - 2019-02-07 22:29 +0000
Re: PureOS and Librem laptops William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2019-02-07 23:46 +0000
Re: PureOS and Librem laptops nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-07 22:47 -0500
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2019-02-06 04:39 +0000
PureOS and Librem laptops <anon@anon.com> - 2019-02-06 06:23 +0000
Re: PureOS and Librem laptops "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2019-02-06 07:56 -0600
Re: PureOS and Librem laptops <anon@anon.com> - 2019-02-07 22:25 +0000
Re: PureOS and Librem laptops Mitch <m.mac@mixnym.net> - 2019-02-08 14:53 +0800
Re: PureOS and Librem laptops "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2019-02-08 08:15 -0600
Re: PureOS and Librem laptops John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> - 2019-02-08 11:03 -0800
Re: PureOS and Librem laptops Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2019-02-16 13:16 +0100
Re: PureOS and Librem laptops Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2019-02-16 12:34 -0500
Re: PureOS and Librem laptops John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> - 2019-02-16 12:32 -0800
Re: Linux-based smartphone focused on privacy befr@eaglesoft.de (Bernd Fröhlich) - 2019-02-06 12:05 +0100
csiph-web