Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > misc.phone.mobile.iphone > #118373
| From | William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> |
|---|---|
| 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 18:43 +0000 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <q3n70p$prd$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (8 earlier) <q3kmng.eq0.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net> <q3ks79$k04$2@dont-email.me> <q3n2ah.8ic.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net> <q3n2j0$mij$3@dont-email.me> <q3n9ea.fpo.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net> |
Cross-posted to 4 groups.
On 2019-02-09, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
> William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote:
>> On 2019-02-09, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
>> > William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote:
>> >> On 2019-02-08, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
>> >> > Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote:
>> >> >> > On 2019-02-07, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> J.O. Aho <user@example.net> wrote:
>> >> >> >>> On 2/6/19 5:24 PM, William Unruh wrote:
>> >> >> >>>> On 2019-02-06, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >>>>> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>> >> >> >>>>>> In article <q3dlkf$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).
>>
>> Ah, so you agree that a phone purchased in the UK may not work all
>> around the world? THAT was my point. I agree that spain, and maybe
>> Morocco (You should have pointed out my misspelling of that as well)
>
> Of course I 'agree'! I never said anything which implies otherwise.
>
> I also note that you now say "may" (not work at all), which is quite
> different from your earlier "and find your phone is as useful as brick",
> which implies *will* (not work).
And if you would quote the whole sentence, it is clear I did NOT say
that you would always find your phone is as useful as a brick. I also
stated that some phones do cover the bands.
>
>> >> 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..
>>
>> I agree. When I posted my mind could not dredge up the correct
>> terminology, and for that I appologise.
>>
>> >> 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.
>>
>> So you agree that many phones do not cover al of the 3G bands or 4G (
>> and many cheap phones do not even cover all the 2G bands).
>
> Again, I've never said or implied otherwise.
>
>> So the question which I originally asked-- what bands does this phone
>> cover?
>
> Yes, that was and is a very legit and relevant question.
>
>> >> 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.
>>
>> So you agree that one must both know about it and search.
>
> Yup, like I said: You've to prepare for travel between totally different
> geographical areas. Duh!
>
>> Note that 2G
>> is being phased out, as the bandwidth is needed for 4G and 5G.
>
> Not that it really matters in this discussion, but because different
> areas use different bands (What *was this discussion about again!? :-)),
> the 'need for bandwidth' issue is also different for different areas, so
> the "as the bandwidth is needed for 4G and 5G" argument is not valid
> worldwide.
>
>> > 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.
>>
>> Ah again you agree that it is not "most phones" that work all over the
>> world. Few phones ( and those that do tend to be the expensive ones) work all
>> over the world.
>
> Nobody ever said that most phones work all over the world, but with
> some planning, it's quite possible to buy a phone - also an inexpensive
> one (mine was (the equivalent of) some 80USD) - which works in *most*
> of the world. Where "works" means you can make/receive (mbile phone)
> calls (After all, we're talking about a *phone*, right! :-)), send and
> receive SMS messages and use 3G *or* 4G Internet.
Of course it is possible and nothing I ever said disputed that. It is
also possible to buy a phone which is a "useful as a brick" when you
travel with it. And figuring out which is which is not easy. First you
have to discover what bands the phone you want covers. Then you have to
figure out what bands are actually used in the country you go to, and if
there is an overlap between your phone and those bands. And you have to
figure out which providers cover those bands that do overlap and whether
you can get a sim from those providers which works. It is far from an
easy task.
In 2G days, it was just "Europe or America (or both)" or, if the US provider used
cdma, forget it. Now with the proliferation of bands, it has become far
more difficult to figure out. If you bring a 2G only phone to the US,
it IS as useful as a brick.
>
> For those people who 'must have' 4G Internet, they indeed will have to
> buy a rather expensive smartphone or use other means to access the
> Internet (for example buy a 'local' cheap mobile hotspot).
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