s|b <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Jan 2025 23:06:47 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
>
> > It provides vanilla Android and not Android mixed with a manufacturer UI
> > and modified functions.
>
> AKA It's not filled with crap from Samsung.

*Every* manufacturer fills their devices with "crap", not just
Samsung.

Only for Google phones, 'we' do not call it "crap", but "vanilla",
"standard", "stock", etc..

Now do the same exercise for Windows and Chrome!

On 2025-01-02 16:05, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> s|b <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>> On Wed, 1 Jan 2025 23:06:47 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
>>
>>> It provides vanilla Android and not Android mixed with a manufacturer UI
>>> and modified functions.
>>
>> AKA It's not filled with crap from Samsung.
>
> *Every* manufacturer fills their devices with "crap", not just
> Samsung.

Hum. No, some manufacturers don't "fill". They add less customization,
like Motorola (Lenovo group). This way updates come faster.

Samsung phones use to have older Android versions, and sometimes they
don't update the phone to the next version after being sold. And that
update comes several months later, because they have to add again their
customization layer. And in the case of Samsung, it is big.

This is not absolutely bad, some people do like those additions. I do
like them, just not the delay they mean.

>
> Only for Google phones, 'we' do not call it "crap", but "vanilla",
> "standard", "stock", etc..

No, google phones come directly without a customization layer.

>
> Now do the same exercise for Windows and Chrome!

Yes, some companies sell their laptops with a lot of customization. Say
HP. This is not bad per se. The recovery feature is good. But the layer
can include apps that slow the laptop while promoting their business
interests.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
> On 2025-01-02 16:05, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> > s|b <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> >> On Wed, 1 Jan 2025 23:06:47 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
> >>
> >>> It provides vanilla Android and not Android mixed with a manufacturer UI
> >>> and modified functions.
> >>
> >> AKA It's not filled with crap from Samsung.
> >
> > *Every* manufacturer fills their devices with "crap", not just
> > Samsung.
>
> Hum. No, some manufacturers don't "fill". They add less customization,
> like Motorola (Lenovo group). This way updates come faster.

I said "fill", because it's the term 's|b' used. I don't consider my
phones "filled with crap" or having too much customization.

> Samsung phones use to have older Android versions, and sometimes they
> don't update the phone to the next version after being sold. And that
> update comes several months later, because they have to add again their
> customization layer. And in the case of Samsung, it is big.

As you said, that *used* to be the case, but is no longer the case for
many years, at least 4+ years, but probably longer. My 4+ year old
Samsung Galaxy A51 lower-range phone came with Android 10 and was
updated to 11, 12 and finally 13.

> This is not absolutely bad, some people do like those additions. I do
> like them, just not the delay they mean.

It's a don't care for me. Security updates come in between the major
versions, not only via the manufacturer, but also through 'Google Play
system updates' (note case of the spelling, they are *system* updates,
not updates to the Google Play app or its other components).

> > Only for Google phones, 'we' do not call it "crap", but "vanilla",
> > "standard", "stock", etc..
>
> No, google phones come directly without a customization layer.

Of course, but they are still customized and I doubt that they don't
come with any Pixel-only or/and third-party software. And over time the
meaning/content of "vanilla"/"standard"/"stock" Android has changed, so
let's not use those meaningless terms and just - as for any Android
phone - mention brand, model and Android version.

And, one man's "crap" is another man's functionality.

> > Now do the same exercise for Windows and Chrome!
>
> Yes, some companies sell their laptops with a lot of customization. Say
> HP. This is not bad per se. The recovery feature is good. But the layer
> can include apps that slow the laptop while promoting their business
> interests.

On my HP laptops there's no "promoting" going on. On the current one,
there's about 100MB of HP-related processes, taking no other resources
(CPU, Disk and Network all at 0%).

FYI, my current laptop no longer has "the recovery feature". There's
no 'Recovery Manager' anymore (which allowed you to re-install a factory
version from the (HP) recovery partition). I assume the Windows 10 and
11 check/repair functions were considered good enough that HP's Recovery
Manager was no longer needed.

Frank Slootweg, 2025-01-02 16:05:

> s|b <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>> On Wed, 1 Jan 2025 23:06:47 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
>>
>>> It provides vanilla Android and not Android mixed with a manufacturer UI
>>> and modified functions.
>>
>> AKA It's not filled with crap from Samsung.
>
> *Every* manufacturer fills their devices with "crap", not just
> Samsung.
>
> Only for Google phones, 'we' do not call it "crap", but "vanilla",
> "standard", "stock", etc..

Because Android on Pixel devices *is* as Google developed it and not
modified by Samsung or any other manufacturer. Of course Google installs
their own apps on it. But most of these apps can be removed or at least
disabled.

The point is, that any feature provided by Android itself is not modifed
as it is usually the case on devices by Samsung, Motorla, Xiaomi etc. -
because those manufacturers want to provide a "unique" user experience
by adding their own UI and their own *system* modifications to Android.

> Now do the same exercise for Windows and Chrome!

What execercise? There is no Windows 10 or 11 which is modified by the
manufacturer in the same way as Android on Smartphones. You only get a
bunch of apps pre-installed in Windows - but things like Windows
Explorer, Windows settings etc. will always look the same, the no matter
what device you purchase with Windows. Also with Windows comes Edge as
default browser, which is not the case for Android devices where you
either get Chrome or Samsung Internet or Xiaomi Browser or whatever the
manufacturer decided to provide.

--
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de

Carlos E.R., 2025-01-02 21:43:

> On 2025-01-02 16:05, Frank Slootweg wrote:
[...]
>> Now do the same exercise for Windows and Chrome!
>
> Yes, some companies sell their laptops with a lot of customization. Say
> HP. This is not bad per se. The recovery feature is good. But the layer
> can include apps that slow the laptop while promoting their business
> interests.

Windows itself is still not customized by HP. Recovery is a built-in
feature of Windows, just used by HP to provide their own tool for it.
But you can always create your own recovery setup in Windows without any
tools by HP.

And all pre-installed apps can be removed in Windows or you just install
a "clean" version of Windows instead of the one provided by HP.

--
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de

Frank Slootweg, 2025-01-03 14:35:

> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
[...]
>> No, google phones come directly without a customization layer.
>
> Of course, but they are still customized and I doubt that they don't

What kind of customizations do you refer to? I don't see any difference
between AOSP and Android with Google Services except that AOSP does not
provide the Google Services of course. But the UI itself including the
UI and features the system apps is the same.

> come with any Pixel-only or/and third-party software. And over time the

Except the Google camera app I don't know any "Pixel only" app. And on
my Pixel 6a I did not find any third-party software at all.

--
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de

On 2025-01-03 14:35, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2025-01-02 16:05, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>>> s|b <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 1 Jan 2025 23:06:47 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> It provides vanilla Android and not Android mixed with a manufacturer UI
>>>>> and modified functions.
>>>>
>>>> AKA It's not filled with crap from Samsung.
>>>
>>> *Every* manufacturer fills their devices with "crap", not just
>>> Samsung.
>>
>> Hum. No, some manufacturers don't "fill". They add less customization,
>> like Motorola (Lenovo group). This way updates come faster.
>
> I said "fill", because it's the term 's|b' used. I don't consider my
> phones "filled with crap" or having too much customization.
>
>> Samsung phones use to have older Android versions, and sometimes they
>> don't update the phone to the next version after being sold. And that
>> update comes several months later, because they have to add again their
>> customization layer. And in the case of Samsung, it is big.
>
> As you said, that *used* to be the case, but is no longer the case for
> many years, at least 4+ years, but probably longer. My 4+ year old
> Samsung Galaxy A51 lower-range phone came with Android 10 and was
> updated to 11, 12 and finally 13.

Probably because your phone is high end. AFAIK Samsung does this with
only some models.

....

--
Cheers, Carlos.

Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
> Frank Slootweg, 2025-01-03 14:35:
>
> > Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
> [...]
> >> No, google phones come directly without a customization layer.
> >
> > Of course, but they are still customized and I doubt that they don't
>
> What kind of customizations do you refer to? I don't see any difference
> between AOSP and Android with Google Services except that AOSP does not
> provide the Google Services of course. But the UI itself including the
> UI and features the system apps is the same.

Mainly customizations for device-specific hardware and - consequently
- customized settings in the submenus of Settings.

> > come with any Pixel-only or/and third-party software. And over time the
>
> Except the Google camera app I don't know any "Pixel only" app. And on
> my Pixel 6a I did not find any third-party software at all.

Thanks. Strange, but if you say so, I accept it of course.

Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
> On 2025-01-03 14:35, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> > Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
> >> On 2025-01-02 16:05, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> >>> s|b <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> >>>> On Wed, 1 Jan 2025 23:06:47 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> It provides vanilla Android and not Android mixed with a manufacturer UI
> >>>>> and modified functions.
> >>>>
> >>>> AKA It's not filled with crap from Samsung.
> >>>
> >>> *Every* manufacturer fills their devices with "crap", not just
> >>> Samsung.
> >>
> >> Hum. No, some manufacturers don't "fill". They add less customization,
> >> like Motorola (Lenovo group). This way updates come faster.
> >
> > I said "fill", because it's the term 's|b' used. I don't consider my
> > phones "filled with crap" or having too much customization.
> >
> >> Samsung phones use to have older Android versions, and sometimes they
> >> don't update the phone to the next version after being sold. And that
> >> update comes several months later, because they have to add again their
> >> customization layer. And in the case of Samsung, it is big.
> >
> > As you said, that *used* to be the case, but is no longer the case for
> > many years, at least 4+ years, but probably longer. My 4+ year old
> > Samsung Galaxy A51 lower-range phone came with Android 10 and was
> > updated to 11, 12 and finally 13.
>
> Probably because your phone is high end. AFAIK Samsung does this with
> only some models.

As I said, see your quote of my text, mine (A51) is a lower-range
(perhaps lower-end would be a better term) phone. It cost 230 Euros. The
A-series is the low(er)-end. The S-series is the higher- to extreme-end.
AFAIK, the update policy (i.e. number of years/versions) is now more or
less equal over the whole product line.

Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
> Carlos E.R., 2025-01-02 21:43:
>
> > On 2025-01-02 16:05, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> [...]
> >> Now do the same exercise for Windows and Chrome!
> >
> > Yes, some companies sell their laptops with a lot of customization. Say
> > HP. This is not bad per se. The recovery feature is good. But the layer
> > can include apps that slow the laptop while promoting their business
> > interests.
>
> Windows itself is still not customized by HP. Recovery is a built-in
> feature of Windows, just used by HP to provide their own tool for it.
> But you can always create your own recovery setup in Windows without any
> tools by HP.

As I indicated in my earlier response, I think Carlos was referring to
HP's 'Recovery Manager'. That is indeed not a customization of Windows
*itself*, but is *not* using any "built-in [recovery] feature on
Windows". HP's Recovery Manager can - amongst other functions - restore
the system to from-factory condition, *including* all third party
software, from a special reserved 'HP RECOVERY' partition.

HP's Recovery Manager was on Windows 8.1 laptops (and desktops?), but,
as I mentioned, no longer on Windows 11 laptops (well at least not on
mine).

> And all pre-installed apps can be removed in Windows or you just install
> a "clean" version of Windows instead of the one provided by HP.

Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
> Frank Slootweg, 2025-01-02 16:05:
>
> > s|b <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> >> On Wed, 1 Jan 2025 23:06:47 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
> >>
> >>> It provides vanilla Android and not Android mixed with a manufacturer UI
> >>> and modified functions.
> >>
> >> AKA It's not filled with crap from Samsung.
> >
> > *Every* manufacturer fills their devices with "crap", not just
> > Samsung.
> >
> > Only for Google phones, 'we' do not call it "crap", but "vanilla",
> > "standard", "stock", etc..
>
> Because Android on Pixel devices *is* as Google developed it and not
> modified by Samsung or any other manufacturer.

AFAIC, for Samsung phones, Android is not modified, but that depends
on what you do (not) consider to be "Android". More on this later.

> Of course Google installs
> their own apps on it. But most of these apps can be removed or at least
> disabled.

Same for Samsung (Google, Samsung and some third-party apps).

> The point is, that any feature provided by Android itself is not modifed
> as it is usually the case on devices by Samsung, Motorla, Xiaomi etc. -
> because those manufacturers want to provide a "unique" user experience
> by adding their own UI and their own *system* modifications to Android.

Well, AFAICT/AFAIAC, for Samsung, the only 'modifications' are: Their
own 'launcher' ('One UI'), which is not all that special/great and
replacements/alternatives for some basic apps like Phone, Messages, My
Files, of course Camera (like for Pixels) and probably simple stuff like
Calendar, Calculator, Notes, etc..

But, except for the launcher, I don't consider those modifications to
*Android* (the 'OS'), but just different *apps*.

That's what I meant: Samsung's et al Android versions are not all that
special and neither are the Pixel versions.

But they are *different* and therefor, as I mentioned, - when talking
about their problems/questions - people should mention brand, model and
Android version.

> > Now do the same exercise for Windows and Chrome!
>
> What execercise? There is no Windows 10 or 11 which is modified by the
> manufacturer in the same way as Android on Smartphones. You only get a
> bunch of apps pre-installed in Windows - but things like Windows
> Explorer, Windows settings etc. will always look the same, the no matter
> what device you purchase with Windows. Also with Windows comes Edge as
> default browser, which is not the case for Android devices where you
> either get Chrome or Samsung Internet or Xiaomi Browser or whatever the
> manufacturer decided to provide.

Well, that mainly *confirms* my point, because, at least for Samsung,
it's exactly the same, with the exceptions of File Explorer (N.B. not
"Windows Explorer", that's only the legacy process name) and Settings.
Samsung indeed has a different 'file manager' than Google's [1], but it
supplies Samsung Internet *and* (Google) Chrome.

But indeed the differences in (Android) Settings are an annoying
aspect, because in this group, it's often about detailed Settings
settings. However, because the often huge differences in features,
functionality, etc, etc., it probably is not practical to come up with a
single Settings UI. And look at the settings mess in Windows, do we
really such a 'standard' on Android!? :-)

[1] At least on my 4+ year old phone. At the time, Google's wasn't all
that red hot. No idea what's on new(er) Samsung phones.

On 1/4/2025 7:59 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

>> Samsung phones use to have older Android versions, and sometimes
>> they don't update the phone to the next version after being sold.
>> And that update comes several months later, because they have to
>> add again their customization layer. And in the case of Samsung, it
>> is big.

> As you said, that *used* to be the case, but is no longer the case
> for many years, at least 4+ years, but probably longer. My 4+ year
> old Samsung Galaxy A51 lower-range phone came with Android 10 and
> was updated to 11, 12 and finally 13.

My 5+ year old Samsung Galaxy S10+ is now at Android version 12. I don't
remember what the version was when I bought it. It says it was last
updated June 1, 2024. It gives me a big green check-mark in a circle
that says "You're all set! Your phone has been updated to the latest
software version." when I check for updates so guess it's still in the
running...

AJL <noemail@none.com> wrote:
> On 1/4/2025 7:59 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> > Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>
> >> Samsung phones use to have older Android versions, and sometimes
> >> they don't update the phone to the next version after being sold.
> >> And that update comes several months later, because they have to
> >> add again their customization layer. And in the case of Samsung, it
> >> is big.
>
> > As you said, that *used* to be the case, but is no longer the case
> > for many years, at least 4+ years, but probably longer. My 4+ year
> > old Samsung Galaxy A51 lower-range phone came with Android 10 and
> > was updated to 11, 12 and finally 13.
>
> My 5+ year old Samsung Galaxy S10+ is now at Android version 12. I don't
> remember what the version was when I bought it. It says it was last
> updated June 1, 2024. It gives me a big green check-mark in a circle
> that says "You're all set! Your phone has been updated to the latest
> software version." when I check for updates so guess it's still in the
> running...

So it still gets updates, probably mostly security updates, but no
Android version updates, otherwise it would be at Android 15 or at least
14.

So *when* are you going to toss that stone age phone of yours!? :-)

On 1/4/2025 12:21 PM, AJL wrote:
> On 1/4/25 11:45 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>> AJL <noemail@none.com> wrote:
>
>>> My 5+ year old Samsung Galaxy S10+ is now at Android version 12.
>>> I don't remember what the version was when I bought it. It says
>>> it was last updated June 1, 2024. It gives me a big green
>>> check-mark in a circle that says "You're all set! Your phone has
>>> been updated to the latest software version." when I check for
>>> updates so guess it's still in the running...
>>
>> So it still gets updates, probably mostly security updates, but no
>> Android version updates, otherwise it would be at Android 15 or
>> at least 14.
>>
>> So *when* are you going to toss that stone age phone of yours!?
>> :-)
>
> Probably when the battery fails. So far for my light use I haven't
> noticed any problems (knocks on wood).
>
> The Android version isn't a problem for me. I'm posting with an
> Amazon tablet that runs an Android fork at about version 9

I just checked my last post's source and it appears I posted it with an
Amazon Fire OS forked Android 11, not 9 as I said. Amazon was apparently
sneaky in one of my recent Amazon tablet updates...

> and for my use it does just fine. I put the Google Play Store on it
> so run most of the same apps as my phone and other toys. It's
> actually one of my favorite tablets as it's light, comfortable to
> hold, has great resolution, and at the sale price of $75US was
> cheap...

AJL <noemail@none.com> wrote:
> On 1/4/25 11:45 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
[...]

> > So *when* are you going to toss that stone age phone of yours!? :-)
>
> Probably when the battery fails. So far for my light use I haven't noticed
> any problems (knocks on wood).
>
> The Android version isn't a problem for me. I'm posting with an Amazon
> tablet that runs an Android fork at about version 9 and for my use it does
> just fine. I put the Google Play Store on it so run most of the same apps
> as my phone and other toys. It's actually one of my favorite tablets as
> it's light, comfortable to hold, has great resolution, and at the sale
> price of $75US was cheap...

Bummer! So you don't have a real excuse to buy new toys, because the
'old' ones still work and refuse to die. What did you do to deserve such
hardship!?

On 1/4/2025 1:43 PM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> AJL <noemail@none.com> wrote:

>> The Android version isn't a problem for me. I'm posting with an
>> Amazon tablet that runs an Android fork at about version 9 and for
>> my use it does just fine. I put the Google Play Store on it so run
>> most of the same apps as my phone and other toys. It's actually one
>> of my favorite tablets as it's light, comfortable to hold, has
>> great resolution, and at the sale price of $75US was cheap...

> Bummer! So you don't have a real excuse to buy new toys, because the
> 'old' ones still work and refuse to die. What did you do to deserve
> such hardship!?

Course I do. The old boring ones are gifted to the grand/greatgrandkids
and I still get to get my new toys. Win-win...

On 2025-01-04 16:10, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
>> Carlos E.R., 2025-01-02 21:43:
>>> On 2025-01-02 16:05, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>> [...]
>>>> Now do the same exercise for Windows and Chrome!
>>>
>>> Yes, some companies sell their laptops with a lot of customization. Say
>>> HP. This is not bad per se. The recovery feature is good. But the layer
>>> can include apps that slow the laptop while promoting their business
>>> interests.
>>
>> Windows itself is still not customized by HP. Recovery is a built-in
>> feature of Windows, just used by HP to provide their own tool for it.
>> But you can always create your own recovery setup in Windows without any
>> tools by HP.
>
> As I indicated in my earlier response, I think Carlos was referring to
> HP's 'Recovery Manager'. That is indeed not a customization of Windows
> *itself*, but is *not* using any "built-in [recovery] feature on
> Windows". HP's Recovery Manager can - amongst other functions - restore
> the system to from-factory condition, *including* all third party
> software, from a special reserved 'HP RECOVERY' partition.

Exactly. Actually, my laptop is a Compaq, which at the time was a second
name of HP. The thing came with W7.

It also had an HP tool to update the machine drivers and things, IIRC.

>
> HP's Recovery Manager was on Windows 8.1 laptops (and desktops?), but,
> as I mentioned, no longer on Windows 11 laptops (well at least not on
> mine).
>
>> And all pre-installed apps can be removed in Windows or you just install
>> a "clean" version of Windows instead of the one provided by HP.

Yes, but then some of the hardware might not work properly.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
> On 2025-01-04 16:10, Frank Slootweg wrote:
[...]

> > As I indicated in my earlier response, I think Carlos was referring to
> > HP's 'Recovery Manager'. That is indeed not a customization of Windows
> > *itself*, but is *not* using any "built-in [recovery] feature on
> > Windows". HP's Recovery Manager can - amongst other functions - restore
> > the system to from-factory condition, *including* all third party
> > software, from a special reserved 'HP RECOVERY' partition.
>
> Exactly. Actually, my laptop is a Compaq, which at the time was a second
> name of HP. The thing came with W7.
>
> It also had an HP tool to update the machine drivers and things, IIRC.

The tool was probably 'HP Support Assistant'. It still exists (i.e.
also on my Windows 11 HP laptop). It also contains all kinds of testing
and diagnostic tools. I someone use the 'HP Battery Check' part of it,
because that really tests the battery, instead of just reporting the
values from the battery's electronics.

[...]

Frank Slootweg wrote:

> Arno Welzel wrote:
>
>> Except the Google camera app I don't know any "Pixel only" app. And on
>> my Pixel 6a I did not find any third-party software at all.
>
> Thanks. Strange, but if you say so, I accept it of course.

The Pixel 8a/9/9pro phones all got android 15 at same time, but my 8a
didn't get all the shiny new apps at the same time, play store either
fails to find them, or claims they're not compatible.

I was able to use APKmirror to install one of them which I wanted, the
others are just AI bloat that I don't want, but I suspect in time
they'll filter down to lesser devices, in the same way that
circle-to-search did.

Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
[...]

> I have two identical tablets. One fell from the bed, the screen cracked,
> doesn't read the finger, so I bought another tablet. Then I tried to
> have the first one repaired; the shop said they could not, but that I
> would be able to use the tablet with a mouse (over BT). So I did. I use
> that old tablet in the sitting room to cast Amazon Prime videos to the
> Google dongle on my TV set (which is not smart).

I had the same problem with my very first (Samsung 10.1") tablet. I
used a wired mouse with a USB On-The-Go adapter to connect it to the
MicroUSB port of the tablet. Later a 'computer' shop 'fixed' it. They
could not find anything wrong with it, but apparently taking it apart,
reseating all the connections and reassembling it, fixed it. Cost 25
Euro. Not bad IMO. Ten years later, the tablet still works, but with
Android 5 and little storage and RAM, it's not very useful.

Fun tidbit: Recently I used it as a 'media center', mainly for
streaming audio (Spotify, etc.) to my soundbar/subwoofer, but because it
was mostly working badly, I turned off Wi-Fi and Bluetooth when not in
use (instead of powering it off). In this mode, the tablet used less
than 1% battery capacity *per day* (including waking up the screen to
check the percentage). Impressive! I don't think my current phone will
manage that (with all its radios off).

[...]

Frank Slootweg wrote:

> Carlos E.R. wrote:
>
>> Samsung phones use to have older Android versions, and sometimes they
>> don't update the phone to the next version after being sold. And that
>> update comes several months later, because they have to add again their
>> customization layer. And in the case of Samsung, it is big.
>
> As you said, that *used* to be the case, but is no longer the case for
> many years, at least 4+ years, but probably longer. My 4+ year old
> Samsung Galaxy A51 lower-range phone came with Android 10 and was
> updated to 11, 12 and finally 13.

Isn't the reason for that improving due to introduction of Project
Treble which allows the manufacturers to "slide in" newer versions of
the lower layers of Android?

Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
> Frank Slootweg wrote:
>
> > Carlos E.R. wrote:
> >
> >> Samsung phones use to have older Android versions, and sometimes they
> >> don't update the phone to the next version after being sold. And that
> >> update comes several months later, because they have to add again their
> >> customization layer. And in the case of Samsung, it is big.
> >
> > As you said, that *used* to be the case, but is no longer the case for
> > many years, at least 4+ years, but probably longer. My 4+ year old
> > Samsung Galaxy A51 lower-range phone came with Android 10 and was
> > updated to 11, 12 and finally 13.
>
> Isn't the reason for that improving due to introduction of Project
> Treble which allows the manufacturers to "slide in" newer versions of
> the lower layers of Android?

Yes, while I do no longer get Android version updates (i.e. not 14 and
15) from Samsung, I still get 'Google Play system update's from Google,
which are what came/comes out of Project Treble and - as you mention -
slides in newer versions of the lower layers of Android.

On 2025-01-05 11:36, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
> [...]
>
>> I have two identical tablets. One fell from the bed, the screen cracked,
>> doesn't read the finger, so I bought another tablet. Then I tried to
>> have the first one repaired; the shop said they could not, but that I
>> would be able to use the tablet with a mouse (over BT). So I did. I use
>> that old tablet in the sitting room to cast Amazon Prime videos to the
>> Google dongle on my TV set (which is not smart).
>
> I had the same problem with my very first (Samsung 10.1") tablet. I
> used a wired mouse with a USB On-The-Go adapter to connect it to the
> MicroUSB port of the tablet. Later a 'computer' shop 'fixed' it. They
> could not find anything wrong with it, but apparently taking it apart,
> reseating all the connections and reassembling it, fixed it. Cost 25
> Euro. Not bad IMO. Ten years later, the tablet still works, but with
> Android 5 and little storage and RAM, it's not very useful.

I use a BT mouse so that I can connect the single micro usb port to the
charger. However, if the battery discharges and the thing powers down, I
have to do a convoluted procedure.

First charge the tablet completely.
On boot up, the BT mouse doesn't pair and doesn't work.
Thus connect a mouse with cable, and use it to toggle the tablet to pair
again with the BT mouse. When I get both mice working, disconnect the
cable, and connect the charger again.

I have the charger connected to a mains timer, so that it is not powered
24 hours, but only some hours. The tablet is on a metal stand from Ikea
(HAVREHOJ) on the table. The thing is tall enough that the tablet is
above the clutter on the table :-D

https://www.ikea.com/es/es/p/havrehoj-soporte-tableta-40534576/

Thus I can use it to control Amazon Prime Video app and cast movies to
the sitting room TV set with a Google dongle :-)

> Fun tidbit: Recently I used it as a 'media center', mainly for
> streaming audio (Spotify, etc.) to my soundbar/subwoofer, but because it
> was mostly working badly, I turned off Wi-Fi and Bluetooth when not in
> use (instead of powering it off). In this mode, the tablet used less
> than 1% battery capacity *per day* (including waking up the screen to
> check the percentage). Impressive! I don't think my current phone will
> manage that (with all its radios off).

Indeed.

Me, I have to be careful not to power off the BT, or I lose the mouse.

>
> [...]

--
Cheers, Carlos.

On 2025-01-05 10:50, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2025-01-04 16:10, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> [...]
>
>>> As I indicated in my earlier response, I think Carlos was referring to
>>> HP's 'Recovery Manager'. That is indeed not a customization of Windows
>>> *itself*, but is *not* using any "built-in [recovery] feature on
>>> Windows". HP's Recovery Manager can - amongst other functions - restore
>>> the system to from-factory condition, *including* all third party
>>> software, from a special reserved 'HP RECOVERY' partition.
>>
>> Exactly. Actually, my laptop is a Compaq, which at the time was a second
>> name of HP. The thing came with W7.
>>
>> It also had an HP tool to update the machine drivers and things, IIRC.
>
> The tool was probably 'HP Support Assistant'. It still exists (i.e.
> also on my Windows 11 HP laptop). It also contains all kinds of testing
> and diagnostic tools. I someone use the 'HP Battery Check' part of it,
> because that really tests the battery, instead of just reporting the
> values from the battery's electronics.
>
> [...]

This laptop has double boot; I have not booted its Windows for years, it
is permanently on an old version of openSUSE Linux because it is 32 bits
and can not be updated. It sits permanently in front of a static
elliptical exercise bike, and I use it to watch part of an episode from
Montalbano serial as I exercise. No rebooot, just hibernation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salvo_Montalbano

This Compaq laptop has very good internal speakers. The battery is dead,
of the type that can be removed with a click.

--
Cheers, Carlos.