bad sector, 2024-04-25 00:55:

> The net is full of people having issues with phones they only thought
> were OFF. My android Zflip is even worse that a simple conventional
> design. Most times I turn it OFF/ON to be sure, there being no obvious,
> bulletproof, always in your face, indication which should be a prerequisite.

Well - as long as you did not explicitely did POWER OFF the phone it is
not turned off. And "power off" means you press and HOLD the power
button until a menu appears where you can select to POWER OFF the
device. Just turning the display off by pressing the power buttons
briefly is not enough of course.

--
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de

On 4/29/24 09:02, Arno Welzel wrote:
> bad sector, 2024-04-25 00:55:
>
>> The net is full of people having issues with phones they only thought
>> were OFF. My android Zflip is even worse that a simple conventional
>> design. Most times I turn it OFF/ON to be sure, there being no obvious,
>> bulletproof, always in your face, indication which should be a prerequisite.
>
> Well - as long as you did not explicitely did POWER OFF the phone it is
> not turned off. And "power off" means you press and HOLD the power
> button until a menu appears where you can select to POWER OFF the
> device. Just turning the display off by pressing the power buttons
> briefly is not enough of course.

There has been a bit of misunderstanding since my OP in which I raised
two issues. When I said "they only thought were OFF" I obviously meant
'on-hook' although an unwanted power-on state could in and of itself
also kill you in the wrong situation. After that MY workaround of
powering off TO ASSURE THAT IT IS ON-HOOK clouded the issue I think, but
both issues remain IMO extremely important all the time.

bad sector, 2024-04-30 01:40:

> On 4/29/24 09:02, Arno Welzel wrote:
>> bad sector, 2024-04-25 00:55:
>>
>>> The net is full of people having issues with phones they only thought
>>> were OFF. My android Zflip is even worse that a simple conventional
>>> design. Most times I turn it OFF/ON to be sure, there being no obvious,
>>> bulletproof, always in your face, indication which should be a prerequisite.
>>
>> Well - as long as you did not explicitely did POWER OFF the phone it is
>> not turned off. And "power off" means you press and HOLD the power
>> button until a menu appears where you can select to POWER OFF the
>> device. Just turning the display off by pressing the power buttons
>> briefly is not enough of course.
>
>
> There has been a bit of misunderstanding since my OP in which I raised
> two issues. When I said "they only thought were OFF" I obviously meant
> 'on-hook' although an unwanted power-on state could in and of itself
> also kill you in the wrong situation. After that MY workaround of
> powering off TO ASSURE THAT IT IS ON-HOOK clouded the issue I think, but
> both issues remain IMO extremely important all the time.

I see - you refer to the question if there is a phone call still active
or unintentially started. Yes, unfortunately, smartphones usually don't
have dedicated "hang up" keys any longer except special models intended
to be used by older or disabled people.

However, when the phone app is still in an active call you should
usually also see a notification about this at the top of the screen.

--
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de

Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
> bad sector, 2024-04-30 01:40:
[...]
> > There has been a bit of misunderstanding since my OP in which I raised
> > two issues. When I said "they only thought were OFF" I obviously meant
> > 'on-hook' although an unwanted power-on state could in and of itself
> > also kill you in the wrong situation. After that MY workaround of
> > powering off TO ASSURE THAT IT IS ON-HOOK clouded the issue I think, but
> > both issues remain IMO extremely important all the time.
>
> I see - you refer to the question if there is a phone call still active
> or unintentially started. Yes, unfortunately, smartphones usually don't
> have dedicated "hang up" keys any longer except special models intended
> to be used by older or disabled people.

Are these scenarios even possible?

(AFAIK,) For a still active phone call: If the remote party 'hangs
up', the connection is terminated and the local phone will be 'on hook'
again.

For an unintentially started phone call: Unless the remote phone keeps
on ringing 'for ever' or switches to voice mail with 'endless'
recording, the call will be terminated at some stage and the local phone
will be 'on hook' again.

FWIW, I don't call or am called all that often (Using a smartphone as
a *phone*, what *will* they think of next! :-)), but I've never had a
situation where the phone was still 'off hook' without me knowing.

> However, when the phone app is still in an active call you should
> usually also see a notification about this at the top of the screen.

I'll have to check how that is on my phone. I normally see the full
screen from the phone app, but have never tested what happens if I make
that go away without hanging up.

On 4/30/24 04:33, Arno Welzel wrote:
> bad sector, 2024-04-30 01:40:
>
>> On 4/29/24 09:02, Arno Welzel wrote:
>>> bad sector, 2024-04-25 00:55:
>>>
>>>> The net is full of people having issues with phones they only thought
>>>> were OFF. My android Zflip is even worse that a simple conventional
>>>> design. Most times I turn it OFF/ON to be sure, there being no obvious,
>>>> bulletproof, always in your face, indication which should be a prerequisite.
>>>
>>> Well - as long as you did not explicitely did POWER OFF the phone it is
>>> not turned off. And "power off" means you press and HOLD the power
>>> button until a menu appears where you can select to POWER OFF the
>>> device. Just turning the display off by pressing the power buttons
>>> briefly is not enough of course.
>>
>>
>> There has been a bit of misunderstanding since my OP in which I raised
>> two issues. When I said "they only thought were OFF" I obviously meant
>> 'on-hook' although an unwanted power-on state could in and of itself
>> also kill you in the wrong situation. After that MY workaround of
>> powering off TO ASSURE THAT IT IS ON-HOOK clouded the issue I think, but
>> both issues remain IMO extremely important all the time.
>
> I see - you refer to the question if there is a phone call still active
> or unintentially started. Yes, unfortunately, smartphones usually don't
> have dedicated "hang up" keys any longer except special models intended
> to be used by older or disabled people.
>
> However, when the phone app is still in an active call you should
> usually also see a notification about this at the top of the screen.

In this day and age of (even apolitical) globalization and cultural
babylon it no longer suffices for communication to be understandable,
communication must henceforth be impossible to misunderstand. The phone
(supposedly) is trying to communicate to the user *vitally important*
information at the top of which list figure power and connection or line
states. If this is not an unconditional success at the level of both
facilitation and communication, and IMO it most certainly is not, I can
see two reasons for that: intentional virtualization distancing the user
from real control and awareness or incompetent hardware/software design
by fucktards (of the kind that we see in cars more every day).

On 4/30/24 05:57, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
>> bad sector, 2024-04-30 01:40:
> [...]
>>> There has been a bit of misunderstanding since my OP in which I raised
>>> two issues. When I said "they only thought were OFF" I obviously meant
>>> 'on-hook' although an unwanted power-on state could in and of itself
>>> also kill you in the wrong situation. After that MY workaround of
>>> powering off TO ASSURE THAT IT IS ON-HOOK clouded the issue I think, but
>>> both issues remain IMO extremely important all the time.
>>
>> I see - you refer to the question if there is a phone call still active
>> or unintentially started. Yes, unfortunately, smartphones usually don't
>> have dedicated "hang up" keys any longer except special models intended
>> to be used by older or disabled people.
>
> Are these scenarios even possible?
>
> (AFAIK,) For a still active phone call: If the remote party 'hangs
> up', the connection is terminated and the local phone will be 'on hook'
> again.

Once (when we were all driving used Chevvy-II's and Pintos with babies
in cribs or child seats) my sister-in-law got a call from her dad
telling her that they were welcome to visit any time (he lived on the
coast). She and her husband were very happy to hear that. But the old
fart kept failing to hang-up so several minutes after that call one of
them picked up the phone only to hear him say to someone physically
beside him "the Rockafellers are coming visiting".

A phone is also an emergency device, I'm not sure how I would call 911
with a hand also holding by belt as a tourniquet on the other arm,
busted up.

We need helluva more brains and bandwidth is the design and developmenmt
bureaus, les freakin' eye-candy and hype and more robust controls and
unmistakable feedback.

bad sector, 2024-04-30 13:21:

> On 4/30/24 05:57, Frank Slootweg wrote:
[...]
>> Are these scenarios even possible?
>>
>> (AFAIK,) For a still active phone call: If the remote party 'hangs
>> up', the connection is terminated and the local phone will be 'on hook'
>> again.
>
> Once (when we were all driving used Chevvy-II's and Pintos with babies
> in cribs or child seats) my sister-in-law got a call from her dad
> telling her that they were welcome to visit any time (he lived on the
> coast). She and her husband were very happy to hear that. But the old
> fart kept failing to hang-up so several minutes after that call one of
> them picked up the phone only to hear him say to someone physically
> beside him "the Rockafellers are coming visiting".

When they did not hang up, yes then this is possible - otherwise not.

--
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de

Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
> bad sector, 2024-04-30 13:21:
>
> > On 4/30/24 05:57, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> [...]
> >> Are these scenarios even possible?
> >>
> >> (AFAIK,) For a still active phone call: If the remote party 'hangs
> >> up', the connection is terminated and the local phone will be 'on hook'
> >> again.
> >
> > Once (when we were all driving used Chevvy-II's and Pintos with babies
> > in cribs or child seats) my sister-in-law got a call from her dad
> > telling her that they were welcome to visit any time (he lived on the
> > coast). She and her husband were very happy to hear that. But the old
> > fart kept failing to hang-up so several minutes after that call one of
> > them picked up the phone only to hear him say to someone physically
> > beside him "the Rockafellers are coming visiting".
>
> When they did not hang up, yes then this is possible - otherwise not.

But that was a scenario with a normal (not mobile) phone with a
seperate handpiece/receiver (we Dutch call it the 'hoorn' (horn). As I
mentioned, (AFAIK, for the reasons I gave) such a scenario is not
possible for a smartphone (and probably also not for most 'dumb'/feature
phones).

My take is that 'bad sector' just wants to ramble/vent.

On 4/30/24 10:01, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
>> bad sector, 2024-04-30 13:21:
>>
>>> On 4/30/24 05:57, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>> [...]
>>>> Are these scenarios even possible?
>>>>
>>>> (AFAIK,) For a still active phone call: If the remote party 'hangs
>>>> up', the connection is terminated and the local phone will be 'on hook'
>>>> again.
>>>
>>> Once (when we were all driving used Chevvy-II's and Pintos with babies
>>> in cribs or child seats) my sister-in-law got a call from her dad
>>> telling her that they were welcome to visit any time (he lived on the
>>> coast). She and her husband were very happy to hear that. But the old
>>> fart kept failing to hang-up so several minutes after that call one of
>>> them picked up the phone only to hear him say to someone physically
>>> beside him "the Rockafellers are coming visiting".
>>
>> When they did not hang up, yes then this is possible - otherwise not.
>
> But that was a scenario with a normal (not mobile) phone with a
> seperate handpiece/receiver (we Dutch call it the 'hoorn' (horn). As I
> mentioned, (AFAIK, for the reasons I gave) such a scenario is not
> possible for a smartphone (and probably also not for most 'dumb'/feature
> phones).
>
> My take is that 'bad sector' just wants to ramble/vent.

Not really, what I want is CHANGE. The BlackBerry had not only real
buttons but chicklety ones extremely well engineeered for that positive
feel. My son had one, they *were disappeared* just when I was getting
set to buy one! I had to do with a basic cell-phone with no texto even.
I did what I needed done but a while ago it packed up so I wanted to buy
another one like it but with texto capability. My provider said
"FORGET-IT, we've been keeping your special low-end account for as long
as you phone would last, now it's NOT renewable anymore". So I went and
bought this android zFlip5 but it's a giga-letdown for too many reasons
to mention and I think I will get rid of it. I can live without a
cell-phone, my take is that demand will eventually force design
improvements as well as open source non-proprietary OS'es developed by
units walking on two legs. Meanwhile I call a spade a spade and I will
let no apple, faecesbook or goongle steer my life, they already have way
too much influence on my bowel movements.

tinyurl.com/3s7bkhw7

bad?sector <forgetski@_invalid.net> wrote:
> On 4/30/24 10:01, Frank Slootweg wrote:
[...]

> > My take is that 'bad sector' just wants to ramble/vent.
>
> Not really, what I want is CHANGE. The BlackBerry had not only real
> buttons but chicklety ones extremely well engineeered for that positive
> feel. My son had one, they *were disappeared* just when I was getting
> set to buy one! I had to do with a basic cell-phone with no texto even.
> I did what I needed done but a while ago it packed up so I wanted to buy
> another one like it but with texto capability. My provider said
> "FORGET-IT, we've been keeping your special low-end account for as long
> as you phone would last, now it's NOT renewable anymore". So I went and
> bought this android zFlip5 but it's a giga-letdown for too many reasons
> to mention and I think I will get rid of it. I can live without a
> cell-phone, my take is that demand will eventually force design
> improvements as well as open source non-proprietary OS'es developed by
> units walking on two legs. Meanwhile I call a spade a spade and I will
> let no apple, faecesbook or goongle steer my life, they already have way
> too much influence on my bowel movements.
>
> tinyurl.com/3s7bkhw7

As I've said to others with similar needs/wants/complaints:

Buy a 'dumb'/'feature' phone and be done with it. They still have real
keys/ buttons. have SMS capability and can work on modern 4G (and of
course 2G and 3G) networks. Problem solved.

On 5/1/24 06:08, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> bad?sector <forgetski@_invalid.net> wrote:
>> On 4/30/24 10:01, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> [...]
>
>>> My take is that 'bad sector' just wants to ramble/vent.
>>
>> Not really, what I want is CHANGE. The BlackBerry had not only real
>> buttons but chicklety ones extremely well engineeered for that positive
>> feel. My son had one, they *were disappeared* just when I was getting
>> set to buy one! I had to do with a basic cell-phone with no texto even.
>> I did what I needed done but a while ago it packed up so I wanted to buy
>> another one like it but with texto capability. My provider said
>> "FORGET-IT, we've been keeping your special low-end account for as long
>> as you phone would last, now it's NOT renewable anymore". So I went and
>> bought this android zFlip5 but it's a giga-letdown for too many reasons
>> to mention and I think I will get rid of it. I can live without a
>> cell-phone, my take is that demand will eventually force design
>> improvements as well as open source non-proprietary OS'es developed by
>> units walking on two legs. Meanwhile I call a spade a spade and I will
>> let no apple, faecesbook or goongle steer my life, they already have way
>> too much influence on my bowel movements.
>>
>> tinyurl.com/3s7bkhw7
>
> As I've said to others with similar needs/wants/complaints:
>
> Buy a 'dumb'/'feature' phone and be done with it. They still have real
> keys/ buttons. have SMS capability and can work on modern 4G (and of
> course 2G and 3G) networks. Problem solved.

Other than satellite, where I live there are only 3 providers one of
which (Bell) doesn't even have my physical address in their data base so
when I call them they say "you do not exist". The other big one (Telus)
is the only major that is available on paper but with only 4g service
and so poor as to make the entire idea of a cell-phone laughable,
tethering is a joke that NEVER works. The third one is a discount arm of
Telus selling their crap for a few pennies less. I'm only saying this to
put things into perspective. Telus as I said will NOT renew my old
plane-jane service for a plain-jane flip phone fare, I have no choice
but to go with the minimal but hefty price of full 5g and tethering
package very little of which could I use with ANY phone and almost none
of which with less. Bottom line, if I have service at all be that
minimally high-end on paper, I might as well have the phone for it.

Problem 'solving' would BEGIN with stomping on the manufacturers' and
providers' balls with both feet and forcing them into line or lose their
market or licenses. Unfortunately our barbie-boy leader always sits with
his legs crossed.

bad?sector <forgetski@_invalid.net> wrote:
> On 5/1/24 06:08, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> > bad?sector <forgetski@_invalid.net> wrote:
> >> On 4/30/24 10:01, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> > [...]
> >
> >>> My take is that 'bad sector' just wants to ramble/vent.
> >>
> >> Not really, what I want is CHANGE. The BlackBerry had not only real
> >> buttons but chicklety ones extremely well engineeered for that positive
> >> feel. My son had one, they *were disappeared* just when I was getting
> >> set to buy one! I had to do with a basic cell-phone with no texto even.
> >> I did what I needed done but a while ago it packed up so I wanted to buy
> >> another one like it but with texto capability. My provider said
> >> "FORGET-IT, we've been keeping your special low-end account for as long
> >> as you phone would last, now it's NOT renewable anymore". So I went and
> >> bought this android zFlip5 but it's a giga-letdown for too many reasons
> >> to mention and I think I will get rid of it. I can live without a
> >> cell-phone, my take is that demand will eventually force design
> >> improvements as well as open source non-proprietary OS'es developed by
> >> units walking on two legs. Meanwhile I call a spade a spade and I will
> >> let no apple, faecesbook or goongle steer my life, they already have way
> >> too much influence on my bowel movements.
> >>
> >> tinyurl.com/3s7bkhw7
> >
> > As I've said to others with similar needs/wants/complaints:
> >
> > Buy a 'dumb'/'feature' phone and be done with it. They still have real
> > keys/ buttons. have SMS capability and can work on modern 4G (and of
> > course 2G and 3G) networks. Problem solved.
>
> Other than satellite, where I live there are only 3 providers one of
> which (Bell) doesn't even have my physical address in their data base so
> when I call them they say "you do not exist". The other big one (Telus)
> is the only major that is available on paper but with only 4g service
> and so poor as to make the entire idea of a cell-phone laughable,
> tethering is a joke that NEVER works. The third one is a discount arm of
> Telus selling their crap for a few pennies less. I'm only saying this to
> put things into perspective. Telus as I said will NOT renew my old
> plane-jane service for a plain-jane flip phone fare, I have no choice
> but to go with the minimal but hefty price of full 5g and tethering
> package very little of which could I use with ANY phone and almost none
> of which with less. Bottom line, if I have service at all be that
> minimally high-end on paper, I might as well have the phone for it.

If you tell the audience where (about) you live, they probably can
give you some sensible and reasonable cost alternative providers,
possibly/probably 'even' some prepaid ones.

Meanwhile we in the read world - meaning non-US or maybe non-NA - have
no such problems. How I use or do not use my phone is no-one's business,
I only pay my provider(s) for what I need/use. End of story.

> Problem 'solving' would BEGIN with stomping on the manufacturers' and
> providers' balls with both feet and forcing them into line or lose their
> market or licenses. Unfortunately our barbie-boy leader always sits with
> his legs crossed.

On 5/2/24 11:22, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> bad?sector <forgetski@_invalid.net> wrote:
>> On 5/1/24 06:08, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>>> bad?sector <forgetski@_invalid.net> wrote:
>>>> On 4/30/24 10:01, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>>> My take is that 'bad sector' just wants to ramble/vent.
>>>>
>>>> Not really, what I want is CHANGE. The BlackBerry had not only real
>>>> buttons but chicklety ones extremely well engineeered for that positive
>>>> feel. My son had one, they *were disappeared* just when I was getting
>>>> set to buy one! I had to do with a basic cell-phone with no texto even.
>>>> I did what I needed done but a while ago it packed up so I wanted to buy
>>>> another one like it but with texto capability. My provider said
>>>> "FORGET-IT, we've been keeping your special low-end account for as long
>>>> as you phone would last, now it's NOT renewable anymore". So I went and
>>>> bought this android zFlip5 but it's a giga-letdown for too many reasons
>>>> to mention and I think I will get rid of it. I can live without a
>>>> cell-phone, my take is that demand will eventually force design
>>>> improvements as well as open source non-proprietary OS'es developed by
>>>> units walking on two legs. Meanwhile I call a spade a spade and I will
>>>> let no apple, faecesbook or goongle steer my life, they already have way
>>>> too much influence on my bowel movements.
>>>>
>>>> tinyurl.com/3s7bkhw7
>>>
>>> As I've said to others with similar needs/wants/complaints:
>>>
>>> Buy a 'dumb'/'feature' phone and be done with it. They still have real
>>> keys/ buttons. have SMS capability and can work on modern 4G (and of
>>> course 2G and 3G) networks. Problem solved.
>>
>> Other than satellite, where I live there are only 3 providers one of
>> which (Bell) doesn't even have my physical address in their data base so
>> when I call them they say "you do not exist". The other big one (Telus)
>> is the only major that is available on paper but with only 4g service
>> and so poor as to make the entire idea of a cell-phone laughable,
>> tethering is a joke that NEVER works. The third one is a discount arm of
>> Telus selling their crap for a few pennies less. I'm only saying this to
>> put things into perspective. Telus as I said will NOT renew my old
>> plane-jane service for a plain-jane flip phone fare, I have no choice
>> but to go with the minimal but hefty price of full 5g and tethering
>> package very little of which could I use with ANY phone and almost none
>> of which with less. Bottom line, if I have service at all be that
>> minimally high-end on paper, I might as well have the phone for it.
>
> If you tell the audience where (about) you live, they probably can
> give you some sensible and reasonable cost alternative providers,
> possibly/probably 'even' some prepaid ones.
>
> Meanwhile we in the read world - meaning non-US or maybe non-NA - have
> no such problems. How I use or do not use my phone is no-one's business,
> I only pay my provider(s) for what I need/use. End of story.

I live in eastern Quebec and our two levels of government can't even
spell "utility price controls" the way they do in Europe where unlimited
4g plans are about 20 euros from what I hear. But cost is NOT the issue
nor the topic which is "is my smartphone ON or OFF including on-hook
off" conditions which IMO are not that obvious all the time nor is their
setting as simple and intuitive as it could and should be.

When designing something as important as a communications tool or its OS
for the masses you sit down with a number of people who have never used
a cell phone and give them one asking 'is that phone ON or is it OFF
right now as it is'? In the event of no answer or a wrong answer it's
back to the drawing board UNTIL YOU GET IT RIGHT! Ditto for putting
on-hook or turning off without reading any manual in which context I
also want to see removable batteries.

I'm not looking to use providers whose head offices do not fall under
Canadian law. As I said there are 3 domestic ones here at least
theoretically available to me, all of them suck and a 4th one which I
haven't named gets such bad reports that I wouldn't even use them if
THEY paid ME.

>> Problem 'solving' would BEGIN with stomping on the manufacturers' and
>> providers' balls with both feet and forcing them into line or lose their
>> market or licenses. Unfortunately our barbie-boy leader always sits with
>> his legs crossed.

bad?sector <forgetski@_invalid.net> wrote:
> On 5/2/24 11:22, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> > bad?sector <forgetski@_invalid.net> wrote:
> >> On 5/1/24 06:08, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> >>> bad?sector <forgetski@_invalid.net> wrote:
> >>>> On 4/30/24 10:01, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> >>> [...]
> >>>
> >>>>> My take is that 'bad sector' just wants to ramble/vent.
> >>>>
> >>>> Not really, what I want is CHANGE. The BlackBerry had not only real
> >>>> buttons but chicklety ones extremely well engineeered for that positive
> >>>> feel. My son had one, they *were disappeared* just when I was getting
> >>>> set to buy one! I had to do with a basic cell-phone with no texto even.
> >>>> I did what I needed done but a while ago it packed up so I wanted to buy
> >>>> another one like it but with texto capability. My provider said
> >>>> "FORGET-IT, we've been keeping your special low-end account for as long
> >>>> as you phone would last, now it's NOT renewable anymore". So I went and
> >>>> bought this android zFlip5 but it's a giga-letdown for too many reasons
> >>>> to mention and I think I will get rid of it. I can live without a
> >>>> cell-phone, my take is that demand will eventually force design
> >>>> improvements as well as open source non-proprietary OS'es developed by
> >>>> units walking on two legs. Meanwhile I call a spade a spade and I will
> >>>> let no apple, faecesbook or goongle steer my life, they already have way
> >>>> too much influence on my bowel movements.
> >>>>
> >>>> tinyurl.com/3s7bkhw7
> >>>
> >>> As I've said to others with similar needs/wants/complaints:
> >>>
> >>> Buy a 'dumb'/'feature' phone and be done with it. They still have real
> >>> keys/ buttons. have SMS capability and can work on modern 4G (and of
> >>> course 2G and 3G) networks. Problem solved.
> >>
> >> Other than satellite, where I live there are only 3 providers one of
> >> which (Bell) doesn't even have my physical address in their data base so
> >> when I call them they say "you do not exist". The other big one (Telus)
> >> is the only major that is available on paper but with only 4g service
> >> and so poor as to make the entire idea of a cell-phone laughable,
> >> tethering is a joke that NEVER works. The third one is a discount arm of
> >> Telus selling their crap for a few pennies less. I'm only saying this to
> >> put things into perspective. Telus as I said will NOT renew my old
> >> plane-jane service for a plain-jane flip phone fare, I have no choice
> >> but to go with the minimal but hefty price of full 5g and tethering
> >> package very little of which could I use with ANY phone and almost none
> >> of which with less. Bottom line, if I have service at all be that
> >> minimally high-end on paper, I might as well have the phone for it.
> >
> > If you tell the audience where (about) you live, they probably can
> > give you some sensible and reasonable cost alternative providers,
> > possibly/probably 'even' some prepaid ones.
> >
> > Meanwhile we in the read world - meaning non-US or maybe non-NA - have
> > no such problems. How I use or do not use my phone is no-one's business,
> > I only pay my provider(s) for what I need/use. End of story.
>
> I live in eastern Quebec and our two levels of government can't even
> spell "utility price controls" the way they do in Europe where unlimited
> 4g plans are about 20 euros from what I hear.

Why do you need an unlimited plan if you only want/need cals and SMS?

> But cost is NOT the issue
> nor the topic which is "is my smartphone ON or OFF including on-hook
> off" conditions which IMO are not that obvious all the time nor is their
> setting as simple and intuitive as it could and should be.
>
> When designing something as important as a communications tool or its OS
> for the masses you sit down with a number of people who have never used
> a cell phone and give them one asking 'is that phone ON or is it OFF
> right now as it is'? In the event of no answer or a wrong answer it's
> back to the drawing board UNTIL YOU GET IT RIGHT! Ditto for putting
> on-hook or turning off without reading any manual in which context I
> also want to see removable batteries.

As I mentioned - and neither you nor anybody else debunked -, with
smartphones, 'dumb' phones and even 'cordless' ('landline') phones,
there *is* no on-hook/off-hook problem scenario.

The on/off demand is unsolvable (without instructions/a_manual), i.e.
unrealistic. It's unsolvable for many/most devices, so why would a
mobile phone be different?

As to (easily, user) removable batteries: Don't hold your breath.

Bottom line:

[Rewind/repeat:]

> >>>>> My take is that 'bad sector' just wants to ramble/vent.

[Resume:]

> I'm not looking to use providers whose head offices do not fall under
> Canadian law. As I said there are 3 domestic ones here at least
> theoretically available to me, all of them suck and a 4th one which I
> haven't named gets such bad reports that I wouldn't even use them if
> THEY paid ME.

There are some Canadian posters in the smartphone groups who could
probably help with finding a Canadian provider, probably a MVNO (Mobile
Virtual Network Operator), but as far as I know, they're iPhone users,
so not likely to follow this group, unless crossposted.

> >> Problem 'solving' would BEGIN with stomping on the manufacturers' and
> >> providers' balls with both feet and forcing them into line or lose their
> >> market or licenses. Unfortunately our barbie-boy leader always sits with
> >> his legs crossed.

On 5/3/24 10:19, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> bad?sector <forgetski@_invalid.net> wrote:

> Why do you need an unlimited plan if you only want/need cals and SMS?

I need a wifi hotspot because my internet provider is in a transition
period with tons of outages, unfortunately except for brief periods my
expensive smartphone wifi acces is useless too. This issue should
resolve before year's end but I will still need a wide band backup of
some capacity.

>> But cost is NOT the issue
>> nor the topic which is "is my smartphone ON or OFF including on-hook
>> off" conditions which IMO are not that obvious all the time nor is their
>> setting as simple and intuitive as it could and should be.
>>
>> When designing something as important as a communications tool or its OS
>> for the masses you sit down with a number of people who have never used
>> a cell phone and give them one asking 'is that phone ON or is it OFF
>> right now as it is'? In the event of no answer or a wrong answer it's
>> back to the drawing board UNTIL YOU GET IT RIGHT! Ditto for putting
>> on-hook or turning off without reading any manual in which context I
>> also want to see removable batteries.
>
> As I mentioned - and neither you nor anybody else debunked -, with
> smartphones, 'dumb' phones and even 'cordless' ('landline') phones,
> there *is* no on-hook/off-hook problem scenario.
>
> The on/off demand is unsolvable (without instructions/a_manual)

No it isn't. Motion sensor and a LOUD display briefly flashing "ON" on
all screens so no display means it's OFF. No one needs a manual for that
much.

> As to (easily, user) removable batteries: Don't hold your breath.

No problemo, in fact I will sleep just as well if smart phones anf half
of humanity vanish altogether but meanwhile I accept one of only two
constraints and that with respect to just about anything: feasability
and demand. These features are doable, demand will decide the rest.
Those that can't keep up with the fast dogs should stay home on the
porch like those carmakers who once said that electric starters needed
large batteries and were for women only anyway.

--
Some people cannot think outside the box, forever complaining that they
cannot find it.

bad sector <forgetski@_invalid.net> wrote:
> On 5/3/24 10:19, Frank Slootweg wrote:
[...]

> > The on/off demand is unsolvable (without instructions/a_manual)
>
> No it isn't. Motion sensor and a LOUD display briefly flashing "ON" on
> all screens so no display means it's OFF. No one needs a manual for that
> much.

But that assumes that the user touches/moves the device. Not an
unreasonable assumption, but an assumption nonetheless.

BTW, you'll be delighted to hear that my Samsung (Galaxy A51) does
essentially that, i.e. the display lights up when I 'pick up' the phone.
Also when kept stationary, for example lying on a table, touching the
display, lights it up ('Always on' display).

> > As to (easily, user) removable batteries: Don't hold your breath.
>
> No problemo, in fact I will sleep just as well if smart phones anf half
> of humanity vanish altogether but meanwhile I accept one of only two
> constraints and that with respect to just about anything: feasability
> and demand. These features are doable, demand will decide the rest.

Yes, (easily, user) removable batteries are doable, but - as already
mentioned - it has it's constraints and disadvantages. Nothing in this
world has only advantages and removable batteries are no exception to
this law.

BTW, don't get me wrong, I'm all in favour of (easily, user) removable
batteries. I had them in my ('dumb' and smart) phones and laptops, but
now have to do without.

On 5/4/24 10:24, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> bad sector <forgetski@_invalid.net> wrote:
>> On 5/3/24 10:19, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> [...]
>
>>> The on/off demand is unsolvable (without instructions/a_manual)
>>
>> No it isn't. Motion sensor and a LOUD display briefly flashing "ON" on
>> all screens so no display means it's OFF. No one needs a manual for that
>> much.
>
> But that assumes that the user touches/moves the device. Not an
> unreasonable assumption, but an assumption nonetheless.
>
> BTW, you'll be delighted to hear that my Samsung (Galaxy A51) does
> essentially that, i.e. the display lights up when I 'pick up' the phone.
> Also when kept stationary, for example lying on a table, touching the
> display, lights it up ('Always on' display).
>
>>> As to (easily, user) removable batteries: Don't hold your breath.
>>
>> No problemo, in fact I will sleep just as well if smart phones anf half
>> of humanity vanish altogether but meanwhile I accept one of only two
>> constraints and that with respect to just about anything: feasability
>> and demand. These features are doable, demand will decide the rest.
>
> Yes, (easily, user) removable batteries are doable, but - as already
> mentioned - it has it's constraints and disadvantages. Nothing in this
> world has only advantages and removable batteries are no exception to
> this law.
>
> BTW, don't get me wrong, I'm all in favour of (easily, user) removable
> batteries. I had them in my ('dumb' and smart) phones and laptops, but
> now have to do without.

What the mass of users or the regulatory acting for them want or are
prepared to put up with is evidently the ultimate deciding factor. What
I do NOT accept is minoritary influences representing only themselves
deciding to include/exclude any feature. It's like should cell-phones
disable themselves within XYZ feet of a car with a runing engine? IMO
they should. Will the using masses or their regulatory insist on it? IMO
they will not because they're too pucking stupid, and so the brainless
chaff WILL continue thinning its own ranks, natural selection at its
evangelical very best :-)