Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > misc.phone.mobile.iphone > #118371
| 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 18:25 +0000 |
| Organization | NOYB |
| Message-ID | <q3n9ea.fpo.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | (7 earlier) <q3jcg8$mrg$1@dont-email.me> <q3kmng.eq0.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net> <q3ks79$k04$2@dont-email.me> <q3n2ah.8ic.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net> <q3n2j0$mij$3@dont-email.me> |
Cross-posted to 4 groups.
William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote:
> On 2019-02-09, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
> > William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote:
> >> On 2019-02-08, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
> >> > Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote:
> >> >> > On 2019-02-07, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> J.O. Aho <user@example.net> wrote:
> >> >> >>> On 2/6/19 5:24 PM, William Unruh wrote:
> >> >> >>>> On 2019-02-06, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >>>>> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> >> >> >>>>>> In article <q3dlkf$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).
> >> 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.
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