Hank Rogers wrote on Fri, 17 May 2024 17:04:49 -0500 :

>> Even if nobody is using them...
>
> Both phones suffer from the shitty and non-user replaceable batteries.
> Glued together.

This is true but at least 5% of Android models still have them.
While 0% of Apple models ever had user-replaceable batteries.

> And the software that drops support after a few years.

The full software support for Android is far better than iOS for a variety
of reasons which the Apple zealots would never be able to comprehend.

For example, apple zealots are completely ignorant that all Android phones
(4.4 & above) are updated monthly completely seamlessly over the Internet.

<https://www.androidheadlines.com/2022/01/google-monthly-changelog-play-system-updates.html>
"Google System updates, meanwhile, are fully automated. Originally
referred to as Project Mainline, these updates fix bugs discovered
in various OS components like device connectivity, location services,
media services, Emergency alerts, and others."

Google & Samsung phones have 7 years of multi-update full support.
*Samsung Extends Android and Security Updates to 7 Years*
<https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/samsung-extends-android-and-security-updates-to-7-years/>
"Samsung phones now come backed with seven years' worth of
security updates and seven generations of OS upgrades."

*Google just put Apple and Samsung on notice - 7 years of software updates*
<https://www.tomsguide.com/opinion/google-pixel-8-software-updates>
"That support covers everything, including full Android updates,
the regular Pixel feature drops and security updates."

Apple only fully supports one release and one release alone.
<https://support.apple.com/guide/deployment/about-software-updates-depc4c80847a/>

Which is partially why iPhones have more than 1-1/2 times known exploits!
<https://www.cisa.gov/known-exploited-vulnerabilities-catalog>

The other part is by all accounts, Apple has the worst QA in the
industry, which was easily proven by Google's Project Zero analysis.

> Both are shitty chinese disposable devices. Pure crap.

This is mostly true, as they are 'shitty disposable devices', but some are
built in India and others in South Korea... not sure about the rest.
> Both are the result of pure greed.

The profit margins on Apple devices are extremely high (around 50%) so
there's less greed (but only due to competition) in Android pricing.

For example, my phone was free (I only had to pay the tax) and T-Mobile
replaced it twice for free (it's my third one) because I broke it twice.

> At least apple has a thriving cult.

I always wondered why Apple has that thriving cult, and I'm only slowly
realizing the Apple users are herd animals who can't think on their own.

On 2024-05-17 17:26, Andrew wrote:
> Hank Rogers wrote on Fri, 17 May 2024 17:04:49 -0500 :
>
>>> Even if nobody is using them...
>>
>> Both phones suffer from the shitty and non-user replaceable batteries.
>> Glued together.
>
> This is true but at least 5% of Android models still have them.
> While 0% of Apple models ever had user-replaceable batteries.

Which is irrelevant.

>
>> And the software that drops support after a few years.
>
> The full software support for Android is far better than iOS for a variety
> of reasons which the Apple zealots would never be able to comprehend.

No... ...it's really not.

>
> For example, apple zealots are completely ignorant that all Android phones
> (4.4 & above) are updated monthly completely seamlessly over the Internet.
>
> <https://www.androidheadlines.com/2022/01/google-monthly-changelog-play-system-updates.html>
> "Google System updates, meanwhile, are fully automated. Originally
> referred to as Project Mainline, these updates fix bugs discovered
> in various OS components like device connectivity, location services,
> media services, Emergency alerts, and others."

Is that every single update?

Don't you tout the wonder of being able to load software from anywhere?

>
> Google & Samsung phones have 7 years of multi-update full support.
> *Samsung Extends Android and Security Updates to 7 Years*
> <https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/samsung-extends-android-and-security-updates-to-7-years/>
> "Samsung phones now come backed with seven years' worth of
> security updates and seven generations of OS upgrades."

That's only for their latest phones.

Apple has mostly supported it's phones for longer than Samsung OR Google.

>
> *Google just put Apple and Samsung on notice - 7 years of software updates*
> <https://www.tomsguide.com/opinion/google-pixel-8-software-updates>
> "That support covers everything, including full Android updates,
> the regular Pixel feature drops and security updates."
>
> Apple only fully supports one release and one release alone.
> <https://support.apple.com/guide/deployment/about-software-updates-depc4c80847a/>

But supports phones going by 5 or 6 years ON that release.

>
> Which is partially why iPhones have more than 1-1/2 times known exploits!
> <https://www.cisa.gov/known-exploited-vulnerabilities-catalog>
>
> The other part is by all accounts, Apple has the worst QA in the
> industry, which was easily proven by Google's Project Zero analysis.

No, actually.

On 5/17/24 9:00 PM, Alan wrote:
> On 2024-05-17 17:26, Andrew wrote:
>> Hank Rogers wrote on Fri, 17 May 2024 17:04:49 -0500 :
>>
>>>> Even if nobody is using them...
>>>
>>> Both phones suffer from the shitty and non-user replaceable batteries.
>>> Glued together.
>>
>> This is true but at least 5% of Android models still have them.
>> While 0% of Apple models ever had user-replaceable batteries.
>
> Which is irrelevant.

Indeed. All that saying that ~95% of Android products have moved along
to current design philosophies, while the last 5% haven't. It would take
some more research to determine if these holdouts are actually still in
production (and for what market segment) or if they're now down to "New
Old Stock" that's still available for sale.

>>> And the software that drops support after a few years.
>>
>> The full software support for Android is far better than iOS for a
>> variety
>> of reasons which the Apple zealots would never be able to comprehend.
>
> No... ...it's really not.

This doesn't actually matter, because fundamentally, its not a profound
statement: by literal definition as per set theory, no subset of a
whole can ever be greater than the whole from which it was a subset.

As such, just what does 'full software support' really mean? Its only
of value if every Android smartphone sold is capable of using the 'full'
breadth of this software set (which is dang near impossible) and then
also only if this 'full' set is materially different (better) than
software sets from other providers (eg, Apple iOS). Plus the Law of
Diminishing Returns applies too: just because something is "N+1" larger
doesn't mean that the "+1" increment is also significant. To use a
analogy, $10,000,001 is pedantically "more money" than $10,000,000, but
that extra dollar doesn't make this difference be significant.

>> For example, apple zealots are completely ignorant that all Android
>> phones
>> (4.4 & above) are updated monthly completely seamlessly over the
>> Internet.
>>
>> <https://www.androidheadlines.com/2022/01/google-monthly-changelog-play-system-updates.html>
>>    "Google System updates, meanwhile, are fully automated. Originally
>>     referred to as Project Mainline, these updates fix bugs discovered
>>     in various OS components like device connectivity, location services,
>>     media services, Emergency alerts, and others."
>
> Is that every single update?
>
> Don't you tout the wonder of being able to load software from anywhere?
>
>>
>> Google & Samsung phones have 7 years of multi-update full support.
>>   *Samsung Extends Android and Security Updates to 7 Years*
>>
>> <https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/samsung-extends-android-and-security-updates-to-7-years/>
>>   "Samsung phones now come backed with seven years' worth of
>>    security updates and seven generations of OS upgrades."
>
> That's only for their latest phones.
>
> Apple has mostly supported it's phones for longer than Samsung OR Google.

Yes, that's been their track record history. Plus:

>>   *Google just put Apple and Samsung on notice - 7 years of software
>> updates*

These "7 years" announcements were clearly made to try to have their
products be better able to compete against Apple.

Plus they're merely promises of future performance which remains yet to
be seen as achievable in real world practice. Let's wait to see what
their respective SEC filings say about these initiatives.

-hh

-hh wrote on Wed, 22 May 2024 11:07:01 -0400 :

>> Which is irrelevant.
>
> Indeed. All that saying that ~95% of Android products have moved along
> to current design philosophies, while the last 5% haven't.

You missed the point of having choices that Apple never gives users
(mainly because there are few companies as anti-consumer as Apple is).

> It would take
> some more research to determine if these holdouts are actually still in
> production (and for what market segment) or if they're now down to "New
> Old Stock" that's still available for sale.

Those were phones on sale at the time that the search was run.

What's relevant is if you're on Android & you want an sd card or an aux
jack or an FM radio, you can extremely easily find a model today with them,
(since about half of Android phones sold today have one or more of them).

Unfortunately, it also means that if you want a user-removable battery,
then your choices are severely limited.

But it also shows Android hardware is always better than iPhone hardware
(because Apple gives you no choice for any of those 4 hardware features).

>>>> And the software that drops support after a few years.
>>>
>>> The full software support for Android is far better than iOS for a
>>> variety
>>> of reasons which the Apple zealots would never be able to comprehend.
>>
>> No... ...it's really not.
>
> This doesn't actually matter, because fundamentally, its not a profound
> statement: by literal definition as per set theory, no subset of a
> whole can ever be greater than the whole from which it was a subset.

Au contraire... given Apple's hotfix support is the worst in the industry,
you're only saying bugfix support isn't important because it's not there.
> As such, just what does 'full software support' really mean?

It's no longer shocking you didn't read Apple's own definition of full
support, given you Apple religious zealots not only know nothing of Apple
products - but you "think" you know everything about Android & iOS.

> Its only
> of value if every Android smartphone sold is capable of using the 'full'
> breadth of this software set (which is dang near impossible) and then
> also only if this 'full' set is materially different (better) than
> software sets from other providers (eg, Apple iOS).

Idiot. You're making lame excuses for Apple only patching all the bugs it
knows about in only the latest iOS or mac release - which are dumb excuses.

Apple's bugfix support for operating systems is the worst in the industry.

> Plus the Law of
> Diminishing Returns applies too: just because something is "N+1" larger
> doesn't mean that the "+1" increment is also significant. To use a
> analogy, $10,000,001 is pedantically "more money" than $10,000,000, but
> that extra dollar doesn't make this difference be significant.

You didn't even read Apple's own explanation that they never patch all the
hole in operating systems that they know exist - except the latest OS only.

>> Apple has mostly supported it's phones for longer than Samsung OR Google.
>
> Yes, that's been their track record history.

Apple's operating system support has _always_ been the worst in the
industry. The only reason you don't know that is you don't know what Apple
says about Apple NOT PATCHING all known bugs in any release but the latest.

>>> � *Google just put Apple and Samsung on notice - 7 years of software
>>> updates*
>
> These "7 years" announcements were clearly made to try to have their
> products be better able to compete against Apple.
>
> Plus they're merely promises of future performance which remains yet to
> be seen as achievable in real world practice. Let's wait to see what
> their respective SEC filings say about these initiatives.

Why do you think the iPhone historically always has had more than twice the
zero-day holes and more than 1-1/2 times the exploits of Android?

Do you think the fact the iPhone is exploited more and has more 0 days may
be because Apple's hotfix support is the worst in the industry perhaps?

See references in the sig since I speak facts about Apple & Android.
--
FACT:
*Apple only fully supports a single release.*
<https://screenrant.com/apple-product-security-update-lifespan/>
<https://support.apple.com/guide/deployment/about-software-updates-depc4c80847a/>
<https://hothardware.com/news/apple-admits-only-fully-patches-security-flaws-in-latest-os-releases>
<https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2022/10/apple-clarifies-security-update-policy-only-the-latest-oses-are-fully-patched/>

FACT:
*Apple always has far more exploits than does Android.*
<https://www.cisa.gov/known-exploited-vulnerabilities-catalog>

FACT:
*Apple only recently (in iOS 16) started the RSR patch mechanism.*
<https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201224>

FACT:
*Google & Craig Federighi both said Apple QA is lacking in coverage.*
<https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2019/08/a-very-deep-dive-into-ios-exploit.html>
"The root causes I highlight here are not novel and are often overlooked.
*We'll see cases of iOS code which seems to have never worked*,
*iOS code that likely skipped QA or likely had little testing*
*or no code review before the iOS release was shipped to users*."

See also:
<https://www.forbes.com/sites/markrogowsky/2016/02/15/what-apple-did-and-didnt-say-about-its-software-quality/>
<https://www.quiverquant.com/news/Apple%20Prioritizes%20Software%20Stability%20Over%20New%20Features%20in%20Strategic%20Shift>
<https://www.axios.com/2018/01/30/scoop-apple-delays-ios-features-to-focus-on-reliability-performance-1517278421>
<https://www.quiverquant.com/news/Apple%20Prioritizes%20Software%20Stability%20Over%20New%20Features%20in%20Strategic%20Shift>

On 2024-05-22 09:27, Andrew wrote:
> -hh wrote on Wed, 22 May 2024 11:07:01 -0400 :
>
>>> Which is irrelevant.
>>
>> Indeed. All that saying that ~95% of Android products have moved along
>> to current design philosophies, while the last 5% haven't.
>
> You missed the point of having choices that Apple never gives users
> (mainly because there are few companies as anti-consumer as Apple is).

And yet Apple has incredible consumer loyalty...

>
>> It would take
>> some more research to determine if these holdouts are actually still in
>> production (and for what market segment) or if they're now down to "New
>> Old Stock" that's still available for sale.
>
> Those were phones on sale at the time that the search was run.
>
> What's relevant is if you're on Android & you want an sd card or an aux
> jack or an FM radio, you can extremely easily find a model today with them,
> (since about half of Android phones sold today have one or more of them).

And yet people keep buying iPhones and replacing them with iPhones when
they change phones.

>
> Unfortunately, it also means that if you want a user-removable battery,
> then your choices are severely limited.
>
> But it also shows Android hardware is always better than iPhone hardware
> (because Apple gives you no choice for any of those 4 hardware features).

LOL!

On 5/22/24 12:27 PM, Andrew wrote:
> -hh wrote on Wed, 22 May 2024 11:07:01 -0400 :
>
>>> Which is irrelevant.
>>
>> Indeed. All that saying that ~95% of Android products have moved along
>> to current design philosophies, while the last 5% haven't.
>
> You missed the point of having choices that Apple never gives users
> (mainly because there are few companies as anti-consumer as Apple is).

Since the rest of the Industry (well, 95%) has adopted the same design
choice, it really isn't as tyrannical of Apple as you're trying to make
it out to be. It is more indicative of Apple appropriately identifying
a "where the puck is going to be".

>> It would take
>> some more research to determine if these holdouts are actually still in
>> production (and for what market segment) or if they're now down to "New
>> Old Stock" that's still available for sale.
>
> Those were phones on sale at the time that the search was run.

I'm aware of that. Now go back and check to see how many of those were
actually --> still in production <-- versus being obsolete stock that
was merely still available for sale.

> What's relevant is if you're on Android & you want an sd card or an aux
> jack or an FM radio, you can extremely easily find a model today with them,
> (since about half of Android phones sold today have one or more of them).

Incorrect, because your claim also means ~half have none of these
features too. And what have all three? Probably just a tiny fraction.

Once again, you're just not being successful in identifying if any of
these product feature are integral to product success in the, to
demonstrate if Apple's disinclination towards them is "anti-consumer".

Indeed, if they were as much of a "pro consumer" differentiator as
you're trying to imply, then the fraction of Androids which featured all
three should be quite large. It isn't.

> Unfortunately, it also means that if you want a user-removable battery,
> then your choices are severely limited.
>
> But it also shows Android hardware is always better than iPhone hardware
> (because Apple gives you no choice for any of those 4 hardware features).

But 95% of Android doesn't offer that choice either, so that feature is
simply not an indicator. Especially since you've not been able to show
if the 5% residual is actually still in production, as opposed to left
over inventory.

>>>>> And the software that drops support after a few years.
>>>>
>>>> The full software support for Android is far better than iOS for a
>>>> variety
>>>> of reasons which the Apple zealots would never be able to comprehend.
>>>
>>> No... ...it's really not.
>>
>> This doesn't actually matter, because fundamentally, its not a profound
>> statement: by literal definition as per set theory, no subset of a
>> whole can ever be greater than the whole from which it was a subset.
>
> Au contraire... given Apple's hotfix support is the worst in the industry,
> you're only saying bugfix support isn't important because it's not there.

Just what is "hotfix" supposed to mean here? And why is it now being
introduced as a new Goalpost?

>> As such, just what does 'full software support' really mean?
>
> It's no longer shocking you didn't read Apple's own definition of full
> support, given you Apple religious zealots not only know nothing of Apple
> products - but you "think" you know everything about Android & iOS.
I've not read the fine print because I'm not a fanboy, nor have I ever
had any issues or troubles from their current & historical level of
product support: I'm predominantly going by what you've tried to brag
about, which I see as evidence of Android/Google trying to catch up.

>> Its only
>> of value if every Android smartphone sold is capable of using the 'full'
>> breadth of this software set (which is dang near impossible) and then
>> also only if this 'full' set is materially different (better) than
>> software sets from other providers (eg, Apple iOS).
>
> Idiot. You're making lame excuses for Apple only patching all the bugs it
> knows about in only the latest iOS or mac release - which are dumb excuses.

How can any software developer patch bugs that they don't know about?

Or are you trying to criticize the entire industry for their practice of
sun-setting support on old obsolete & superseded software that's if its
used by anyone at all, its <0.0001% of the installed base?

If so, show us the dates of the latest bug & security updates for
Android OS versions 1 (2008) through 6 (2015): I'm sure that there's
been zero for the past five years, if not longer.

> Apple's bugfix support for operating systems is the worst in the industry.

Unsubstantiated claim. Golly, how about that.

>> Plus the Law of
>> Diminishing Returns applies too: just because something is "N+1" larger
>> doesn't mean that the "+1" increment is also significant. To use a
>> analogy, $10,000,001 is pedantically "more money" than $10,000,000, but
>> that extra dollar doesn't make this difference be significant.
>
> You didn't even read Apple's own explanation that they never patch all the
> hole in operating systems that they know exist - except the latest OS only.

You're correct that I didn't bother to read that, because all that one
has to do to mitigate whatever theoretical risk you're concerned about
is just to maintain one's equipment to the latest OS. Since MacOS and
iOS updates from Apple are free of charge, there's few reasons not to.

>>> Apple has mostly supported it's phones for longer than Samsung OR Google.
>>
>> Yes, that's been their track record history.
>
> Apple's operating system support has _always_ been the worst in the
> industry. The only reason you don't know that is you don't know what Apple
> says about Apple NOT PATCHING all known bugs in any release but the latest.

Unsubstantiated claim. Again. Golly, how about that.

>>>> � *Google just put Apple and Samsung on notice - 7 years of software
>>>> updates*
>>
>> These "7 years" announcements were clearly made to try to have their
>> products be better able to compete against Apple.
>>
>> Plus they're merely promises of future performance which remains yet to
>> be seen as achievable in real world practice. Let's wait to see what
>> their respective SEC filings say about these initiatives.
>
> Why do you think the iPhone historically always has had more than twice the
> zero-day holes and more than 1-1/2 times the exploits of Android? > Do you think the fact the iPhone is exploited more and has more 0
days may
> be because Apple's hotfix support is the worst in the industry perhaps?

"When asked why he robbed banks, Sutton simply replied,
'Because that's where the money is.'"

> See references in the sig since I speak facts about Apple & Android.

No need to, as you clearly don't sufficiently understand the industry.

-hh

-hh wrote on Fri, 24 May 2024 10:30:57 -0400 :

>> You missed the point of having choices that Apple never gives users
>> (mainly because there are few companies as anti-consumer as Apple is).
>
> Since the rest of the Industry (well, 95%) has adopted the same design
> choice, it really isn't as tyrannical of Apple as you're trying to make
> it out to be. It is more indicative of Apple appropriately identifying
> a "where the puck is going to be".

You're so desperate to excuse Apple's well-known anti-consumer stance that
you brazen fabricate out of thin air that more than half is, now, only 5%?

>>> It would take
>>> some more research to determine if these holdouts are actually still in
>>> production (and for what market segment) or if they're now down to "New
>>> Old Stock" that's still available for sale.
>>
>> Those were phones on sale at the time that the search was run.
>
> I'm aware of that. Now go back and check to see how many of those were
> actually --> still in production <-- versus being obsolete stock that
> was merely still available for sale.

Those are recent figures which you hate because Apple has never supplied
the user with basic hardware functionality that Android always enjoyed.

>> What's relevant is if you're on Android & you want an sd card or an aux
>> jack or an FM radio, you can extremely easily find a model today with them,
>> (since about half of Android phones sold today have one or more of them).
>
> Incorrect, because your claim also means ~half have none of these
> features too. And what have all three? Probably just a tiny fraction.
>
> Once again, you're just not being successful in identifying if any of
> these product feature are integral to product success in the, to
> demonstrate if Apple's disinclination towards them is "anti-consumer".
>
> Indeed, if they were as much of a "pro consumer" differentiator as
> you're trying to imply, then the fraction of Androids which featured all
> three should be quite large. It isn't.

It's no longer shocking how desperate you Apple religious zealots are to
defend that Apple has never supplied you with basic hardware functionality.

>> Unfortunately, it also means that if you want a user-removable battery,
>> then your choices are severely limited.
>>
>> But it also shows Android hardware is always better than iPhone hardware
>> (because Apple gives you no choice for any of those 4 hardware features).
>
> But 95% of Android doesn't offer that choice either, so that feature is
> simply not an indicator. Especially since you've not been able to show
> if the 5% residual is actually still in production, as opposed to left
> over inventory.

It's no longer amazing how desperate you are to defend that cheap iPhone
which has never had even the most basic of standard hardware functionality.

>>>>>> And the software that drops support after a few years.
>>>>>
>>>>> The full software support for Android is far better than iOS for a
>>>>> variety
>>>>> of reasons which the Apple zealots would never be able to comprehend.
>>>>
>>>> No... ...it's really not.
>>>
>>> This doesn't actually matter, because fundamentally, its not a profound
>>> statement: by literal definition as per set theory, no subset of a
>>> whole can ever be greater than the whole from which it was a subset.
>>
>> Au contraire... given Apple's hotfix support is the worst in the industry,
>> you're only saying bugfix support isn't important because it's not there.
>
> Just what is "hotfix" supposed to mean here? And why is it now being
> introduced as a new Goalpost?

You zealots are so desperate to defend Apple's worst support in the
industry that you claim you don't even know what a bug fix is?

>>> As such, just what does 'full software support' really mean?
>>
>> It's no longer shocking you didn't read Apple's own definition of full
>> support, given you Apple religious zealots not only know nothing of Apple
>> products - but you "think" you know everything about Android & iOS.
> I've not read the fine print because I'm not a fanboy, nor have I ever
> had any issues or troubles from their current & historical level of
> product support: I'm predominantly going by what you've tried to brag
> about, which I see as evidence of Android/Google trying to catch up.

You're too desperate. Fixing all the known bugs is not fine print.
Fixing all known bugs is what everyone does for multiple releases.
*Except Apple*

Only Apple only fixes all the bugs it knows about in only one release.
*Apple has the worst support in the industry*
>>> Its only
>>> of value if every Android smartphone sold is capable of using the 'full'
>>> breadth of this software set (which is dang near impossible) and then
>>> also only if this 'full' set is materially different (better) than
>>> software sets from other providers (eg, Apple iOS).
>>
>> Idiot. You're making lame excuses for Apple only patching all the bugs it
>> knows about in only the latest iOS or mac release - which are dumb excuses.
>
> How can any software developer patch bugs that they don't know about?
>
> Or are you trying to criticize the entire industry for their practice of
> sun-setting support on old obsolete & superseded software that's if its
> used by anyone at all, its <0.0001% of the installed base?
>
> If so, show us the dates of the latest bug & security updates for
> Android OS versions 1 (2008) through 6 (2015): I'm sure that there's
> been zero for the past five years, if not longer.

You are defending what is known to be the absolute worst support in the
industry & you don't even understand how iOS or Android update.

>> Apple's bugfix support for operating systems is the worst in the industry.
>
> Unsubstantiated claim. Golly, how about that.

Read the cites. Every operating system except Apple's patches all bugs they
know about in multiple releases. Only Apple doesn't. That's just a fact.

<https://screenrant.com/apple-product-security-update-lifespan/>
<https://hothardware.com/news/apple-admits-only-fully-patches-security-flaws-in-latest-os-releases>
<https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2022/10/apple-clarifies-security-update-policy-only-the-latest-oses-are-fully-patched/>

>>> Plus the Law of
>>> Diminishing Returns applies too: just because something is "N+1" larger
>>> doesn't mean that the "+1" increment is also significant. To use a
>>> analogy, $10,000,001 is pedantically "more money" than $10,000,000, but
>>> that extra dollar doesn't make this difference be significant.
>>
>> You didn't even read Apple's own explanation that they never patch all the
>> hole in operating systems that they know exist - except the latest OS only.
>
> You're correct that I didn't bother to read that, because all that one
> has to do to mitigate whatever theoretical risk you're concerned about
> is just to maintain one's equipment to the latest OS. Since MacOS and
> iOS updates from Apple are free of charge, there's few reasons not to.

It's no longer shocking you Apple religious zealots deny even what Apple
said about their hotfix support being the worst in the industry bar none.
<https://support.apple.com/guide/deployment/about-software-updates-depc4c80847a/>

>>>> Apple has mostly supported it's phones for longer than Samsung OR Google.
>>>
>>> Yes, that's been their track record history.
>>
>> Apple's operating system support has _always_ been the worst in the
>> industry. The only reason you don't know that is you don't know what Apple
>> says about Apple NOT PATCHING all known bugs in any release but the latest.
>
> Unsubstantiated claim. Again. Golly, how about that.

And yet, I provided the cites which prove only Apple patches all the bugs
it knows about only in a single release while nobody's support is that bad.

Samsung and Google support 7 years of operating system updates
and 7 years of security updates to the operating system, Jolly Roger.
*Samsung Extends Android and Security Updates to 7 Years*

<https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/samsung-extends-android-and-security-updates-to-7-years/>
"Samsung phones now come backed with seven years' worth of
security updates and seven generations of OS upgrades."

On 5/22/2024 8:07 AM, -hh wrote:

<snip>

> Indeed.  All that saying that ~95% of Android products have moved along
> to current design philosophies, while the last 5% haven't. It would take
> some more research to determine if these holdouts are actually still in
> production (and for what market segment) or if they're now down to "New
> Old Stock" that's still available for sale.

Thankfully, one iPhone philosophy, only on U.S. models, has not been
adopted by any Android phone manufacturers, and that's the decontenting
of the physical SIM slot. This loss is a a royal PITA if you're
traveling outside the U.S. and want to buy a local SIM card complete
with a phone number. While foreign data-only eSIMs are readily available
for travelers, travel eSIMs that include an actual phone number, are few
and far between.

My sister's boyfriend had his iPhone 12 stolen in Paris and he needed to
buy a new iPhone. He had a hard time finding an iPhone 13 since there
was such a rush on the 13 when the 14 came out. He travels a lot and
needs to use a physical foreign SIM.

--
“If you are not an expert on a subject, then your opinions about it
really do matter less than the opinions of experts. It's not
indoctrination nor elitism. It's just that you don't know as much as
they do about the subject.”—Tin Foil Awards

On 2024-05-24 08:53, Andrew wrote:
> -hh wrote on Fri, 24 May 2024 10:30:57 -0400 :
>
>>> You missed the point of having choices that Apple never gives users
>>> (mainly because there are few companies as anti-consumer as Apple is).
>> Since the rest of the Industry (well, 95%) has adopted the same design
>> choice, it really isn't as tyrannical of Apple as you're trying to make
>> it out to be. It is more indicative of Apple appropriately identifying
>> a "where the puck is going to be".
> You're so desperate to excuse Apple's well-known anti-consumer stance that
> you brazen fabricate out of thin air that more than half is, now, only 5%?
>
>>>> It would take
>>>> some more research to determine if these holdouts are actually still in
>>>> production (and for what market segment) or if they're now down to "New
>>>> Old Stock" that's still available for sale.
>>> Those were phones on sale at the time that the search was run.
>> I'm aware of that. Now go back and check to see how many of those were
>> actually --> still in production <-- versus being obsolete stock that
>> was merely still available for sale.
> Those are recent figures which you hate because Apple has never supplied
> the user with basic hardware functionality that Android always enjoyed.
>
>>> What's relevant is if you're on Android & you want an sd card or an aux
>>> jack or an FM radio, you can extremely easily find a model today with them,
>>> (since about half of Android phones sold today have one or more of them).
>> Incorrect, because your claim also means ~half have none of these
>> features too. And what have all three? Probably just a tiny fraction.
>>
>> Once again, you're just not being successful in identifying if any of
>> these product feature are integral to product success in the, to
>> demonstrate if Apple's disinclination towards them is "anti-consumer".
>>
>> Indeed, if they were as much of a "pro consumer" differentiator as
>> you're trying to imply, then the fraction of Androids which featured all
>> three should be quite large. It isn't.
> It's no longer shocking how...

....you refuse to address the points HH actually made?

You're right about that.

On 2024-05-24 09:44, sms wrote:
> On 5/22/2024 8:07 AM, -hh wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Indeed.  All that saying that ~95% of Android products have moved
>> along to current design philosophies, while the last 5% haven't. It
>> would take some more research to determine if these holdouts are
>> actually still in production (and for what market segment) or if
>> they're now down to "New Old Stock" that's still available for sale.
>
> Thankfully, one iPhone philosophy, only on U.S. models, has not been
> adopted by any Android phone manufacturers, and that's the decontenting
> of the physical SIM slot. This loss is a a royal PITA if you're
> traveling outside the U.S. and want to buy a local SIM card complete
> with a phone number. While foreign data-only eSIMs are readily available
> for travelers, travel eSIMs that include an actual phone number, are few
> and far between.
>
> My sister's boyfriend had his iPhone 12 stolen in Paris and he needed to
> buy a new iPhone. He had a hard time finding an iPhone 13 since there
> was such a rush on the 13 when the 14 came out. He travels a lot and
> needs to use a physical foreign SIM.
>

You not understanding the physical SIMs can be made in to eSIMs is not
the world's problem.

On 5/24/24 9:08 PM, Alan wrote:
> On 2024-05-24 09:44, sms wrote:
>> On 5/22/2024 8:07 AM, -hh wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> Indeed.  All that saying that ~95% of Android products have moved
>>> along to current design philosophies, while the last 5% haven't. It
>>> would take some more research to determine if these holdouts are
>>> actually still in production (and for what market segment) or if
>>> they're now down to "New Old Stock" that's still available for sale.
>>
>> Thankfully, one iPhone philosophy, only on U.S. models, has not been
>> adopted by any Android phone manufacturers, and that's the
>> decontenting of the physical SIM slot. This loss is a a royal PITA if
>> you're traveling outside the U.S. and want to buy a local SIM card
>> complete with a phone number. While foreign data-only eSIMs are
>> readily available for travelers, travel eSIMs that include an actual
>> phone number, are few and far between.
>>
>> My sister's boyfriend had his iPhone 12 stolen in Paris and he needed
>> to buy a new iPhone. He had a hard time finding an iPhone 13 since
>> there was such a rush on the 13 when the 14 came out. He travels a lot
>> and needs to use a physical foreign SIM.
>>
>
> You not understanding the physical SIMs can be made in to eSIMs is not
> the world's problem.

I wasn't aware of this .. if one buys a physical SIM in a random foreign
smokeshop (or whatever), what's the process for entering into an
eSIM-only smartphone like?

-hh

On 5/24/24 11:53 AM, Andrew wrote:
> -hh wrote on Fri, 24 May 2024 10:30:57 -0400 :
>
>>> You missed the point of having choices that Apple never gives users
>>> (mainly because there are few companies as anti-consumer as Apple is).
>>
>> Since the rest of the Industry (well, 95%) has adopted the same design
>> choice, it really isn't as tyrannical of Apple as you're trying to make
>> it out to be. It is more indicative of Apple appropriately identifying
>> a "where the puck is going to be".
>
> You're so desperate to excuse Apple's well-known anti-consumer stance that
> you brazen fabricate out of thin air that more than half is, now, only 5%?

No, it was based on what you said: half of Android contain at least one
of these features that you worship .. that's ~50% .. and you conceded
that virtually none contain all three: I was gracious and allocated 5%
to that.

Now you're welcome to go provide the substantiating citations which
quantify the value more accurately, so get to it. Frankly, I'd be quite
surprised if it exceeded even but 1% of Android sales, esp. in the West.

>>>> It would take
>>>> some more research to determine if these holdouts are actually still in
>>>> production (and for what market segment) or if they're now down to "New
>>>> Old Stock" that's still available for sale.
>>>
>>> Those were phones on sale at the time that the search was run.
>>
>> I'm aware of that. Now go back and check to see how many of those were
>> actually --> still in production <-- versus being obsolete stock that
>> was merely still available for sale.
>
> Those are recent figures which you hate because Apple has never supplied
> the user with basic hardware functionality that Android always enjoyed.

It doesn't matter if the figures are 'recent' because what you've
provided does not identify and differentiate between products currently
in production vs "New Old Stock" that was discontinued 1-20 years ago.

As such, you're not making a successful line of argument for describing
what Android's *current* product feature set decisions are.

>>> What's relevant is if you're on Android & you want an sd card or an aux
>>> jack or an FM radio, you can extremely easily find a model today with them,
>>> (since about half of Android phones sold today have one or more of them).
>>
>> Incorrect, because your claim also means ~half have none of these
>> features too. And what have all three? Probably just a tiny fraction.
>>
>> Once again, you're just not being successful in identifying if any of
>> these product feature are integral to product success in the, to
>> demonstrate if Apple's disinclination towards them is "anti-consumer".
>>
>> Indeed, if they were as much of a "pro consumer" differentiator as
>> you're trying to imply, then the fraction of Androids which featured all
>> three should be quite large. It isn't.
>
> It's no longer shocking how desperate you Apple religious zealots are to
> defend that Apple has never supplied you with basic hardware functionality.

Nah. I've had smartphones with removable batteries & microSDs, so I
actually know what I'm allegedly "missing out on" by those features
being dropped in favor of others.

The facts of the matter are that if these features that you're trying to
taut were actually compelling to users, then more than 5% of Androids
would be equipped with them today. They're not. Indeed, by your own
claim, barely half of them bother to have at least one of this set.

>>> Unfortunately, it also means that if you want a user-removable battery,
>>> then your choices are severely limited.
>>>
>>> But it also shows Android hardware is always better than iPhone hardware
>>> (because Apple gives you no choice for any of those 4 hardware features).
>>
>> But 95% of Android doesn't offer that choice either, so that feature is
>> simply not an indicator. Especially since you've not been able to show
>> if the 5% residual is actually still in production, as opposed to left
>> over inventory.
>
> It's no longer amazing how desperate you are to defend that cheap iPhone
> which has never had even the most basic of standard hardware functionality.

If your claim was true that these features are fundamental to (as you
call it): "the most basic of standard hardware functionality", then why
do essentially no Android smartphones feature them either?

>>>>>>> And the software that drops support after a few years.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The full software support for Android is far better than iOS for a
>>>>>> variety
>>>>>> of reasons which the Apple zealots would never be able to comprehend.
>>>>>
>>>>> No... ...it's really not.
>>>>
>>>> This doesn't actually matter, because fundamentally, its not a profound
>>>> statement: by literal definition as per set theory, no subset of a
>>>> whole can ever be greater than the whole from which it was a subset.
>>>
>>> Au contraire... given Apple's hotfix support is the worst in the industry,
>>> you're only saying bugfix support isn't important because it's not there.
>>
>> Just what is "hotfix" supposed to mean here? And why is it now being
>> introduced as a new Goalpost?
>
> You zealots are so desperate to defend Apple's worst support in the
> industry that you claim you don't even know what a bug fix is?

You said "hotfix", not "bugfix".
If you made a typographical error here, clearly say so.

>>>> As such, just what does 'full software support' really mean?
>>>
>>> It's no longer shocking you didn't read Apple's own definition of full
>>> support, given you Apple religious zealots not only know nothing of Apple
>>> products - but you "think" you know everything about Android & iOS.
>> I've not read the fine print because I'm not a fanboy, nor have I ever
>> had any issues or troubles from their current & historical level of
>> product support: I'm predominantly going by what you've tried to brag
>> about, which I see as evidence of Android/Google trying to catch up.
>
> You're too desperate. Fixing all the known bugs is not fine print.

No, that's not what was being said.

> Fixing all known bugs is what everyone does for multiple releases.
> *Except Apple*

Except that the proof that your statement is false was contained within
the challenge I gave you below ... which you've dodged addressing.

> Only Apple only fixes all the bugs it knows about in only one release.
> *Apple has the worst support in the industry*

YA Unsubstantiated claim. Cite, please.

>>>> Its only
>>>> of value if every Android smartphone sold is capable of using the 'full'
>>>> breadth of this software set (which is dang near impossible) and then
>>>> also only if this 'full' set is materially different (better) than
>>>> software sets from other providers (eg, Apple iOS).
>>>
>>> Idiot. You're making lame excuses for Apple only patching all the bugs it
>>> knows about in only the latest iOS or mac release - which are dumb excuses.
>>
>> How can any software developer patch bugs that they don't know about?

Silence!

>> Or are you trying to criticize the entire industry for their practice of
>> sun-setting support on old obsolete & superseded software that's if its
>> used by anyone at all, its <0.0001% of the installed base?

Silence!

>> If so, show us the dates of the latest bug & security updates for
>> Android OS versions 1 (2008) through 6 (2015): I'm sure that there's
>> been zero for the past five years, if not longer.
>
> You are defending what is known to be the absolute worst support in the
> industry & you don't even understand how iOS or Android update.

On the contrary: because *NO* version of Android OS 1 - 6 (inclusive)
have received any bugfixes or security updates for the past five (5)
years, it shows that Android support isn't "forever" as you've tried to
imply in your criticisms on how Apple provides their own support.

>>> Apple's bugfix support for operating systems is the worst in the industry.
>>
>> Unsubstantiated claim. Golly, how about that.
>
> Read the cites. Every operating system except Apple's patches all bugs they
> know about in multiple releases. Only Apple doesn't. That's just a fact.

On 5/26/2024 10:05 AM, -hh wrote:
> On 5/24/24 9:08 PM, Alan wrote:

<snip>

>> You not understanding the physical SIMs can be made in to eSIMs is not
>> the world's problem.
>
> I wasn't aware of this .. if one buys a physical SIM in a random foreign
> smokeshop (or whatever), what's the process for entering into an
> eSIM-only smartphone like?

See: <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TnEvkwgEWhM>. It's been done to
add a physical SIM to an eSIM only iPhone, but it's not trivial.

Basically, he has it backwards. eSIMs can be loaded onto a phone that
only has a physical SIM slot, using eSIM.me <https://esim.me/>, but not
the other way around.

What is needed is the ability to put a physical SIM into an iPhone that
only has eSIMs (only the iPhone 14 & 15 models sold in the U.S.). For
the rest of the world, except China, you still get one physical SIM slot
and one eSIM slot. In China you get two physical SIM slots.

For data-only, an eSIM is fine. If you're traveling, and want a foreign
phone number as well as data, then you're usually stuck with a physical SIM.

--
“If you are not an expert on a subject, then your opinions about it
really do matter less than the opinions of experts. It's not
indoctrination nor elitism. It's just that you don't know as much as
they do about the subject.”—Tin Foil Awards

On 2024-05-26 10:05, -hh wrote:
> On 5/24/24 9:08 PM, Alan wrote:
>> On 2024-05-24 09:44, sms wrote:
>>> On 5/22/2024 8:07 AM, -hh wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>> Indeed.  All that saying that ~95% of Android products have moved
>>>> along to current design philosophies, while the last 5% haven't. It
>>>> would take some more research to determine if these holdouts are
>>>> actually still in production (and for what market segment) or if
>>>> they're now down to "New Old Stock" that's still available for sale.
>>>
>>> Thankfully, one iPhone philosophy, only on U.S. models, has not been
>>> adopted by any Android phone manufacturers, and that's the
>>> decontenting of the physical SIM slot. This loss is a a royal PITA if
>>> you're traveling outside the U.S. and want to buy a local SIM card
>>> complete with a phone number. While foreign data-only eSIMs are
>>> readily available for travelers, travel eSIMs that include an actual
>>> phone number, are few and far between.
>>>
>>> My sister's boyfriend had his iPhone 12 stolen in Paris and he needed
>>> to buy a new iPhone. He had a hard time finding an iPhone 13 since
>>> there was such a rush on the 13 when the 14 came out. He travels a
>>> lot and needs to use a physical foreign SIM.
>>>
>>
>> You not understanding the physical SIMs can be made in to eSIMs is not
>> the world's problem.
>
> I wasn't aware of this .. if one buys a physical SIM in a random foreign
> smokeshop (or whatever), what's the process for entering into an
> eSIM-only smartphone like?

I did some of this for a client before she left Canada for the winter.
She was going to carry around both phones so she could have both her
Canada number and her US number available to her, when I explained she
could have both on one phone.

In the process, I came across this:

'Convert a physical SIM to an eSIM on the same iPhone

You can convert a physical SIM to an eSIM on the same iPhone, if your
carrier supports it. Follow these steps:'

<https://support.apple.com/en-ca/118669>