The mention of a new one elsewhere prompts me to ask what I have long
wondered - what's so special about i-stuff, apart from the price? My
daughter has an i-phone which costs a small fortune every month, I have
a Samsung android 'phone and a Samsung android tablet and find both
entirely adequate and reliable - and affordable.

--
Jenny M Benson

On 13/09/2023 10:16, Jenny M Benson wrote:
> The mention of a new one elsewhere prompts me to ask what I have long
> wondered - what's so special about i-stuff, apart from the price?  My
> daughter has an i-phone which costs a small fortune every month, I have
> a Samsung android 'phone and a Samsung android tablet and find both
> entirely adequate and reliable - and affordable.
>
iDonotknow

--
Ric

On 13/09/2023 10:16, Jenny M Benson wrote:
> The mention of a new one elsewhere prompts me to ask what I have long
> wondered - what's so special about i-stuff, apart from the price?  My
> daughter has an i-phone which costs a small fortune every month, I have
> a Samsung android 'phone and a Samsung android tablet and find both
> entirely adequate and reliable - and affordable.
>

<YANAOU>

iCrap stuff has a high level of interoperability which some people seem
to like. It's there now in android/google devices too and I hate it - I
like to be in control of what goes where and not e.g. autmagically have
photos deleted everywhere when I delete them in 1 place.

When BrratSki was an architecture student some 25 years ago I bought him
a second hand Apple laptop thingummy as recommended for his course. I
tried to use it myself and found it impossible as nothing was where you
expected it to be and it was impossible to get behind the scenes. A
friend who was a highly skilled robotics/AI/tech guru lost all his
recordings on iTunes when they changed something and even he could not
recover them. That was the last straw for me and I vowed never to touch
them again.

Some people like having it all done for them of course, but another
aspect of this integration is that it makes it very difficult to leave
the Apple universe too as nothing then works, which of course works for
Apple.

On Wed, 13 Sep 2023 10:16:05 +0100, Jenny M Benson
<NemoNews@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

>The mention of a new one elsewhere prompts me to ask what I have long
>wondered - what's so special about i-stuff, apart from the price? My
>daughter has an i-phone which costs a small fortune every month, I have
>a Samsung android 'phone and a Samsung android tablet and find both
>entirely adequate and reliable - and affordable.

Er......I think my phone before iphone was a samsung and was fine. I
just wanted texts and phone and dislike aps but everybody wants you to
get theirs.I thought it was be easier on the iphone as everyone uses
it in the family and friends, even 4 year olds did when 4. I'm still
very clunky on use after a couple of years. And the ipad is not as
user friendly as a desktop. B is setting everything up for me on it
but.. ah well, it is good to learn new things. I was using Prestel
before people got accounts and before www. Just ..got left behind
somewhere.

In message <kmdf46Frm2iU1@mid.individual.net> at Wed, 13 Sep 2023
10:53:10, BrritSki <rtilburyTAKEOUT@gmail.com> writes
>On 13/09/2023 10:16, Jenny M Benson wrote:
>> The mention of a new one elsewhere prompts me to ask what I have long
>>wondered - what's so special about i-stuff, apart from the price?  My
>>daughter has an i-phone which costs a small fortune every month, I
>>have a Samsung android 'phone and a Samsung android tablet and find
>>both entirely adequate and reliable - and affordable.
>>
iStuff is, undoubtedly, good quality, and also the customer support is
pretty good. On the other hand, there's a strong aspect of "walled
garden": they have tight control of what you can do/use on it. (_Can_ be
got round to some extent, but on the whole if you're going to, which
involves jumping through lots of hoops, I'd say you're not the target
iCustomer.) This makes support very good, and there is of course the
interopability between devices.

This is not _entirely_ unique to the Apple world - I think the Android
world has _elements_ of it, and each new version of Windows suggests
Microsoft want to have increased such control too.

I personally like more control of what happens/goes where, so I stick
with this Windows 7 - and stayed with Windows XP for a long time. Each
to his own level of control: I _do_ let Windows do a lot for me - I
haven't gone the Linux route. (Apple is a car with the bonnet welded
shut; Linux cars come as a kit. Windows is somewhere in between.)

Your daughter having stuff that costs a fortune every month - that's
another matter; all the OS drivers want us to move towards a rental
model, plus the mobile service providers want their pound of flesh (fair
enough to some extent, as they have ongoing costs). Or is the monthly
cost just paying off the cost of the hardware, i. e. it's effectively on
h. p.?
>
><YANAOU>
>
>iCrap stuff has a high level of interoperability which some people seem
>to like. It's there now in android/google devices too and I hate it - I
>like to be in control of what goes where and not e.g. autmagically have
>photos deleted everywhere when I delete them in 1 place.
>
>When BrratSki was an architecture student some 25 years ago I bought
>him a second hand Apple laptop thingummy as recommended for his course.
>I tried to use it myself and found it impossible as nothing was where

I found the same with Android when I had a smartphone. To some extent, I
think it's just a matter of grasping a different way of doing/looking at
things; I acknowledge that I wasn't (am not) good at that. Someone who
has started with Apple - or Android - I think has similar problems if
they try to use Windows. (Of course, Windows itself suffers in that way
as it evolves, but _on the whole_ the changes are of lesser magnitude
than going to one of the others. [W8 was a bit of an exception, and they
learnt their lesson there.])

>you expected it to be and it was impossible to get behind the scenes. A
>friend who was a highly skilled robotics/AI/tech guru lost all his
>recordings on iTunes when they changed something and even he could not
>recover them. That was the last straw for me and I vowed never to touch
>them again.

I back up to an external hard drive - entirely once a month, and my
genealogy and emails once a week. I also finally gave in and actually
_bought_ one of the undelete packages, so I can (well, so far have been
able to) retrieve anything _I_ accidentally delete; whether that would
work with something like iTunes, that maybe doesn't delete things but
just puts them in mysterious places, I don't know.

I don't use any of the cloud services ("cloud" just means "on someone
else's computer") to store anything. By modern standards, that makes me
very old-fashioned.
>
>Some people like having it all done for them of course, but another
>aspect of this integration is that it makes it very difficult to leave
>the Apple universe too as nothing then works, which of course works for
>Apple.
>
In many cases, plain data _can_ be moved out (though I don't know if
their word-processor uses an incompatible format). I did encounter an
iProblem when someone emailed me some pictures she'd taken - they were
in the default format for iPhones, which IrfanView didn't handle. But
fortunately I found something to install after which IV did handle them.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Advertising is legalized lying. - H.G. Wells

On 13.9.23 10:53, BrritSki wrote:
> On 13/09/2023 10:16, Jenny M Benson wrote:
>> The mention of a new one elsewhere prompts me to ask what I have long
>> wondered - what's so special about i-stuff, apart from the price?  My
>> daughter has an i-phone which costs a small fortune every month, I
>> have a Samsung android 'phone and a Samsung android tablet and find
>> both entirely adequate and reliable - and affordable.
>>
>
> <YANAOU>
>
> iCrap stuff has a high level of interoperability which some people seem
> to like. It's there now in android/google devices too and I hate it - I
> like to be in control of what goes where and not e.g. autmagically have
> photos deleted everywhere when I delete them in 1 place.
>
> When BrratSki was an architecture student some 25 years ago I bought him
> a second hand Apple laptop thingummy as recommended for his course. I
> tried to use it myself and found it impossible as nothing was where you
> expected it to be and it was impossible to get behind the scenes. A
> friend who was a highly skilled robotics/AI/tech guru lost all his
> recordings on iTunes when they changed something and even he could not
> recover them. That was the last straw for me and I vowed never to touch
> them again.
>
> Some people like having it all done for them of course, but another
> aspect of this integration is that it makes it very difficult to leave
> the Apple universe too as nothing then works, which of course works for
> Apple.
>

I have one which is used almost exclusively for web browsing to catch up
news and more recently to play sudoku. It is useful too to use for
Teams and Zoom meetings as desktop does not have a camera and for some
reason I do not understand people want to watch you these days. When I
made phone call I concentrated on listening.

--
Kosmo Richard W
www.travelswmw.whitnet.uk
https://tinyurl.com/KRWpics

krw <krw@whitnet.uk> wrote:
> On 13.9.23 10:53, BrritSki wrote:
>> On 13/09/2023 10:16, Jenny M Benson wrote:
>>> The mention of a new one elsewhere prompts me to ask what I have long
>>> wondered - what's so special about i-stuff, apart from the price?  My
>>> daughter has an i-phone which costs a small fortune every month, I
>>> have a Samsung android 'phone and a Samsung android tablet and find
>>> both entirely adequate and reliable - and affordable.
>>>
>>
>> <YANAOU>
>>
>> iCrap stuff has a high level of interoperability which some people seem
>> to like. It's there now in android/google devices too and I hate it - I
>> like to be in control of what goes where and not e.g. autmagically have
>> photos deleted everywhere when I delete them in 1 place.
>>
>> When BrratSki was an architecture student some 25 years ago I bought him
>> a second hand Apple laptop thingummy as recommended for his course. I
>> tried to use it myself and found it impossible as nothing was where you
>> expected it to be and it was impossible to get behind the scenes. A
>> friend who was a highly skilled robotics/AI/tech guru lost all his
>> recordings on iTunes when they changed something and even he could not
>> recover them. That was the last straw for me and I vowed never to touch
>> them again.
>>
>> Some people like having it all done for them of course, but another
>> aspect of this integration is that it makes it very difficult to leave
>> the Apple universe too as nothing then works, which of course works for
>> Apple.
>>
>
> I have one which is used almost exclusively for web browsing to catch up
> news and more recently to play sudoku. It is useful too to use for
> Teams and Zoom meetings as desktop does not have a camera and for some
> reason I do not understand people want to watch you these days. When I
> made phone call I concentrated on listening.
>

This is (to me at least) an interesting point KRW, I am content to
communicate without a picture too; whether this has anything to do with my
poor sight I dunno but, I find listening to a voice and concentrating on
what is actually being said is very informative. I know there is a lot of
talk about body language telling an observer a lot about the speaker and
their true meanings etc, but if you can’t see that body language - is it
really that necessary? I don’t make a lot of use of Zoom or Teams etc. but
when I do I just listen to the speaker - I don’t strain to watch them and
probably still not observe all the visual things going on; I say save the
bandwidth and use audio only!

--
Toodle Pip, Mike McMillan

On 14.9.23 14:52, Mike McMillan wrote:
> krw <krw@whitnet.uk> wrote:
>> On 13.9.23 10:53, BrritSki wrote:
>>> On 13/09/2023 10:16, Jenny M Benson wrote:
>>>> The mention of a new one elsewhere prompts me to ask what I have long
>>>> wondered - what's so special about i-stuff, apart from the price?  My
>>>> daughter has an i-phone which costs a small fortune every month, I
>>>> have a Samsung android 'phone and a Samsung android tablet and find
>>>> both entirely adequate and reliable - and affordable.
>>>>
>>>
>>> <YANAOU>
>>>
>>> iCrap stuff has a high level of interoperability which some people seem
>>> to like. It's there now in android/google devices too and I hate it - I
>>> like to be in control of what goes where and not e.g. autmagically have
>>> photos deleted everywhere when I delete them in 1 place.
>>>
>>> When BrratSki was an architecture student some 25 years ago I bought him
>>> a second hand Apple laptop thingummy as recommended for his course. I
>>> tried to use it myself and found it impossible as nothing was where you
>>> expected it to be and it was impossible to get behind the scenes. A
>>> friend who was a highly skilled robotics/AI/tech guru lost all his
>>> recordings on iTunes when they changed something and even he could not
>>> recover them. That was the last straw for me and I vowed never to touch
>>> them again.
>>>
>>> Some people like having it all done for them of course, but another
>>> aspect of this integration is that it makes it very difficult to leave
>>> the Apple universe too as nothing then works, which of course works for
>>> Apple.
>>>
>>
>> I have one which is used almost exclusively for web browsing to catch up
>> news and more recently to play sudoku. It is useful too to use for
>> Teams and Zoom meetings as desktop does not have a camera and for some
>> reason I do not understand people want to watch you these days. When I
>> made phone call I concentrated on listening.
>>
>
> This is (to me at least) an interesting point KRW, I am content to
> communicate without a picture too; whether this has anything to do with my
> poor sight I dunno but, I find listening to a voice and concentrating on
> what is actually being said is very informative. I know there is a lot of
> talk about body language telling an observer a lot about the speaker and
> their true meanings etc, but if you can’t see that body language - is it
> really that necessary? I don’t make a lot of use of Zoom or Teams etc. but
> when I do I just listen to the speaker - I don’t strain to watch them and
> probably still not observe all the visual things going on; I say save the
> bandwidth and use audio only!
>

A lot has been said about body language and I accept that when present
in the same room it is there. Online - given the lags and slight
freezes (we are not on dial up but it feels like it some time).
Yesterday I was on a phobile to phobile call and the drop outs at the
start of the call were awful. One of us must have moved because it got
better - but I do not think body language comes across online. I would
use audio only but the other party tends to insist and at the moment I
am doing a lot of online demonstration - log on here, do this download
and enter that data there - which needs the video as well.

--
Kosmo Richard W
www.travelswmw.whitnet.uk
https://tinyurl.com/KRWpics

In message <udv374$2l2el$1@dont-email.me> at Thu, 14 Sep 2023 13:52:36,
Mike McMillan <toodle.pip1@virginmedia.com> writes
>krw <krw@whitnet.uk> wrote:
[]
>> I have one which is used almost exclusively for web browsing to catch up
>> news and more recently to play sudoku. It is useful too to use for
>> Teams and Zoom meetings as desktop does not have a camera and for some
>> reason I do not understand people want to watch you these days. When I
>> made phone call I concentrated on listening.
>>
>
>This is (to me at least) an interesting point KRW, I am content to
>communicate without a picture too; whether this has anything to do with my
>poor sight I dunno but, I find listening to a voice and concentrating on
>what is actually being said is very informative. I know there is a lot of
>talk about body language telling an observer a lot about the speaker and
>their true meanings etc, but if you can’t see that body language - is it
>really that necessary? I don’t make a lot of use of Zoom or Teams etc. but

Not really.

>when I do I just listen to the speaker - I don’t strain to watch them and
>probably still not observe all the visual things going on; I say save the
>bandwidth and use audio only!
>
I think partly, possibly especially since the pandemic, such meetings
involve a lot more than the two people traditionally involved with a
'phone call. As such, some things _are_ easier with pictures: a show of
hands for example, and it's also a lot easier to run the meeting if you
agree on things like raising a hand (or clicking something that does an
equivalent electronically) if you want to speak: such meetings (we'd
just got our laptops for the parish council in time for the pandemic,
which was fortunate) _aren't_ as good as face-to-face ones in the same
room.

Thinking about it, when I was in work, we did indeed occasionally have
"conference calls" over the 'phone system - audio only, but with a
speakerphone - but those were _mostly_ with all the participants bar one
or two in the same room, and the one or two remote. I think such a
meeting between even as few as half a dozen individuals, all remote from
the rest, would have been very hard work.

But yes, for one to one, video is certainly not necessary. (Much as it
isn't for a lot of TV; I have the news channel on as I'm reading and
writing these, and only glance at it occasionally - and for dramas that
have AD, I do much the same.) For informal things, like conversations I
may have with cousins on another continent, I may well
Skype/Zoom/whatever, (a) because it's actually easier (and certainly
cheaper!), (b) there _may_ be times I want to show them something on my
screen (which most videoconferencing software can do).
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

If, after hearing my songs, just one human being is inspired to say something
nasty to a friend, or perhaps to strike a loved one, it will all have been
worth the while. - Liner notes, "Songs & More Songs By Tom Lehrer", Rhino
Records, 1997.

krw <krw@whitnet.uk> wrote:
> On 14.9.23 14:52, Mike McMillan wrote:
>> krw <krw@whitnet.uk> wrote:
>>> On 13.9.23 10:53, BrritSki wrote:
>>>> On 13/09/2023 10:16, Jenny M Benson wrote:
>>>>> The mention of a new one elsewhere prompts me to ask what I have long
>>>>> wondered - what's so special about i-stuff, apart from the price?  My
>>>>> daughter has an i-phone which costs a small fortune every month, I
>>>>> have a Samsung android 'phone and a Samsung android tablet and find
>>>>> both entirely adequate and reliable - and affordable.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <YANAOU>
>>>>
>>>> iCrap stuff has a high level of interoperability which some people seem
>>>> to like. It's there now in android/google devices too and I hate it - I
>>>> like to be in control of what goes where and not e.g. autmagically have
>>>> photos deleted everywhere when I delete them in 1 place.
>>>>
>>>> When BrratSki was an architecture student some 25 years ago I bought him
>>>> a second hand Apple laptop thingummy as recommended for his course. I
>>>> tried to use it myself and found it impossible as nothing was where you
>>>> expected it to be and it was impossible to get behind the scenes. A
>>>> friend who was a highly skilled robotics/AI/tech guru lost all his
>>>> recordings on iTunes when they changed something and even he could not
>>>> recover them. That was the last straw for me and I vowed never to touch
>>>> them again.
>>>>
>>>> Some people like having it all done for them of course, but another
>>>> aspect of this integration is that it makes it very difficult to leave
>>>> the Apple universe too as nothing then works, which of course works for
>>>> Apple.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I have one which is used almost exclusively for web browsing to catch up
>>> news and more recently to play sudoku. It is useful too to use for
>>> Teams and Zoom meetings as desktop does not have a camera and for some
>>> reason I do not understand people want to watch you these days. When I
>>> made phone call I concentrated on listening.
>>>
>>
>> This is (to me at least) an interesting point KRW, I am content to
>> communicate without a picture too; whether this has anything to do with my
>> poor sight I dunno but, I find listening to a voice and concentrating on
>> what is actually being said is very informative. I know there is a lot of
>> talk about body language telling an observer a lot about the speaker and
>> their true meanings etc, but if you can’t see that body language - is it
>> really that necessary? I don’t make a lot of use of Zoom or Teams etc. but
>> when I do I just listen to the speaker - I don’t strain to watch them and
>> probably still not observe all the visual things going on; I say save the
>> bandwidth and use audio only!
>>
>
> A lot has been said about body language and I accept that when present
> in the same room it is there. Online - given the lags and slight
> freezes (we are not on dial up but it feels like it some time).
> Yesterday I was on a phobile to phobile call and the drop outs at the
> start of the call were awful. One of us must have moved because it got
> better - but I do not think body language comes across online. I would
> use audio only but the other party tends to insist and at the moment I
> am doing a lot of online demonstration - log on here, do this download
> and enter that data there - which needs the video as well.
>

Nothing in the ‘body language’ stakes comes even close to a pair of dog’s
eyes when they want/need something!

--
Toodle Pip, Mike McMillan

On 14.9.23 15:52, Mike McMillan wrote:
> krw <krw@whitnet.uk> wrote:
>> On 14.9.23 14:52, Mike McMillan wrote:
>>> krw <krw@whitnet.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 13.9.23 10:53, BrritSki wrote:
>>>>> On 13/09/2023 10:16, Jenny M Benson wrote:
>>>>>> The mention of a new one elsewhere prompts me to ask what I have long
>>>>>> wondered - what's so special about i-stuff, apart from the price?  My
>>>>>> daughter has an i-phone which costs a small fortune every month, I
>>>>>> have a Samsung android 'phone and a Samsung android tablet and find
>>>>>> both entirely adequate and reliable - and affordable.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> <YANAOU>
>>>>>
>>>>> iCrap stuff has a high level of interoperability which some people seem
>>>>> to like. It's there now in android/google devices too and I hate it - I
>>>>> like to be in control of what goes where and not e.g. autmagically have
>>>>> photos deleted everywhere when I delete them in 1 place.
>>>>>
>>>>> When BrratSki was an architecture student some 25 years ago I bought him
>>>>> a second hand Apple laptop thingummy as recommended for his course. I
>>>>> tried to use it myself and found it impossible as nothing was where you
>>>>> expected it to be and it was impossible to get behind the scenes. A
>>>>> friend who was a highly skilled robotics/AI/tech guru lost all his
>>>>> recordings on iTunes when they changed something and even he could not
>>>>> recover them. That was the last straw for me and I vowed never to touch
>>>>> them again.
>>>>>
>>>>> Some people like having it all done for them of course, but another
>>>>> aspect of this integration is that it makes it very difficult to leave
>>>>> the Apple universe too as nothing then works, which of course works for
>>>>> Apple.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have one which is used almost exclusively for web browsing to catch up
>>>> news and more recently to play sudoku. It is useful too to use for
>>>> Teams and Zoom meetings as desktop does not have a camera and for some
>>>> reason I do not understand people want to watch you these days. When I
>>>> made phone call I concentrated on listening.
>>>>
>>>
>>> This is (to me at least) an interesting point KRW, I am content to
>>> communicate without a picture too; whether this has anything to do with my
>>> poor sight I dunno but, I find listening to a voice and concentrating on
>>> what is actually being said is very informative. I know there is a lot of
>>> talk about body language telling an observer a lot about the speaker and
>>> their true meanings etc, but if you can’t see that body language - is it
>>> really that necessary? I don’t make a lot of use of Zoom or Teams etc. but
>>> when I do I just listen to the speaker - I don’t strain to watch them and
>>> probably still not observe all the visual things going on; I say save the
>>> bandwidth and use audio only!
>>>
>>
>> A lot has been said about body language and I accept that when present
>> in the same room it is there. Online - given the lags and slight
>> freezes (we are not on dial up but it feels like it some time).
>> Yesterday I was on a phobile to phobile call and the drop outs at the
>> start of the call were awful. One of us must have moved because it got
>> better - but I do not think body language comes across online. I would
>> use audio only but the other party tends to insist and at the moment I
>> am doing a lot of online demonstration - log on here, do this download
>> and enter that data there - which needs the video as well.
>>
>
> Nothing in the ‘body language’ stakes comes even close to a pair of dog’s
> eyes when they want/need something!
>

Especially a labrador.

--
Kosmo Richard W
www.travelswmw.whitnet.uk
https://tinyurl.com/KRWpics

In message <20OdnZ6f6tbSvZ74nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@brightview.co.uk> at Thu,
14 Sep 2023 16:01:34, krw <krw@whitnet.uk> writes
>On 14.9.23 15:52, Mike McMillan wrote:
[]
>> Nothing in the ‘body language’ stakes comes even close to a pair
>>of dog’s
>> eyes when they want/need something!
>>
>
>Especially a labrador.
>
Oh, I don't know:
https://255soft.uk/temp/%5Bopening%20crisps%20in%20pub%5D%20ETBC-1qXQAAhh
VW.jpg
(Can't remember where I got that - a tweet, I think. _Had_ to save it.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

The first objective of any tyrant in Whitehall would be to make Parliament
utterly subservient to his will; and the next to overturn or diminish trial by
jury ..." Lord Devlin (http://www.holbornchambers.co.uk)

J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
> In message <20OdnZ6f6tbSvZ74nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@brightview.co.uk> at Thu,
> 14 Sep 2023 16:01:34, krw <krw@whitnet.uk> writes
>> On 14.9.23 15:52, Mike McMillan wrote:
> []
>>> Nothing in the ‘body language’ stakes comes even close to a pair
>>> of dog’s
>>> eyes when they want/need something!
>>>
>>
>> Especially a labrador.
>>
> Oh, I don't know:
> https://255soft.uk/temp/%5Bopening%20crisps%20in%20pub%5D%20ETBC-1qXQAAhh
> VW.jpg
> (Can't remember where I got that - a tweet, I think. _Had_ to save it.)

Error 404 - is it me or Whoosh?

--
Toodle Pip, Mike McMillan

On 14.9.23 17:09, Mike McMillan wrote:
> J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
>> In message <20OdnZ6f6tbSvZ74nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@brightview.co.uk> at Thu,
>> 14 Sep 2023 16:01:34, krw <krw@whitnet.uk> writes
>>> On 14.9.23 15:52, Mike McMillan wrote:
>> []
>>>> Nothing in the ‘body language’ stakes comes even close to a pair
>>>> of dog’s
>>>> eyes when they want/need something!
>>>>
>>>
>>> Especially a labrador.
>>>
>> Oh, I don't know:
>> https://255soft.uk/temp/%5Bopening%20crisps%20in%20pub%5D%20ETBC-1qXQAAhh
>> VW.jpg
>> (Can't remember where I got that - a tweet, I think. _Had_ to save it.)
>
> Error 404 - is it me or Whoosh?
>

Error 404 here too!

--
Kosmo Richard W
www.travelswmw.whitnet.uk
https://tinyurl.com/KRWpics

On 14/09/2023 17:12, krw wrote:
> On 14.9.23 17:09, Mike McMillan wrote:
>> J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <20OdnZ6f6tbSvZ74nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@brightview.co.uk> at Thu,
>>> 14 Sep 2023 16:01:34, krw <krw@whitnet.uk> writes
>>>> On 14.9.23 15:52, Mike McMillan wrote:
>>> []
>>>>> Nothing in the ‘body language’ stakes comes even close to a pair
>>>>> of dog’s
>>>>> eyes when they want/need something!
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Especially a labrador.
>>>>
>>> Oh, I don't know:
>>> https://255soft.uk/temp/%5Bopening%20crisps%20in%20pub%5D%20ETBC-1qXQAAhh
>>> VW.jpg
>>> (Can't remember where I got that - a tweet, I think. _Had_ to save it.)
>>
>> Error 404 - is it me or Whoosh?
>>
>
> Error 404 here too!
>

The link failed to survive the line break. There's a shortened version
at <https://tinyl.io/9OBo>, which might work better.

--
Best wishes, Serena
I have deja vu and amnesia at once, I've forgotten this before! (anon)

On 13/09/2023 10:16, Jenny M Benson wrote:
> The mention of a new one elsewhere prompts me to ask what I have long
> wondered - what's so special about i-stuff, apart from the price?  My
> daughter has an i-phone which costs a small fortune every month, I have
> a Samsung android 'phone and a Samsung android tablet and find both
> entirely adequate and reliable - and affordable.
>

I was in the fortunate position to buy an iPad outright, so no ongoing
fees. The advantage to me is that my granddaughter has an iPad. She
also has an iPhone but no sim, so is unable to send messages. With my
iPad she is now able to message very easily and loves doing it. It has
brought us closer. She is also (of course, being young) a whizz with
technology (actually more than being just young, she takes out books
from the adult section of the library for silver surfers and reads them
cover to cover, understands them and can convey what people want to
know). I then bought an iPhone as with FaceTime (requires other i
users) you can easily video contact people. This is also something my
granddaughter loves. Also, since I have broken my shoulder I have found
FaceTime invaluable. My builder can now FaceTime me and walk around the
plot of the new-to-me house, showing me things and answering questions
as he goes. I was also fortunate enough to be able to afford to buy my
iPhone 14 outright.

I know it's not the same if you can't afford to buy outright and I also
understand that it doesn't allow as much looking under the car's bonnet
as Android, but for me it's ideal.

OTOH, I definitely would never swap to an Apple computer. They may be
advertised as not getting viruses but from the experiences of my
acupuncturist they can be the devil's own work when it comes to updating
the OS.

--
Jane
The Amethyst Artist
BTME

http://www.clothandclay.co.uk/umra/cookbook.htm - Umrats' recipes

Serena Blanchflower <nospam@blanchflower.me.uk> wrote:
> On 14/09/2023 17:12, krw wrote:
>> On 14.9.23 17:09, Mike McMillan wrote:
>>> J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <20OdnZ6f6tbSvZ74nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@brightview.co.uk> at Thu,
>>>> 14 Sep 2023 16:01:34, krw <krw@whitnet.uk> writes
>>>>> On 14.9.23 15:52, Mike McMillan wrote:
>>>> []
>>>>>> Nothing in the ‘body language’ stakes comes even close to a pair
>>>>>> of dog’s
>>>>>> eyes when they want/need something!
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Especially a labrador.
>>>>>
>>>> Oh, I don't know:
>>>> https://255soft.uk/temp/%5Bopening%20crisps%20in%20pub%5D%20ETBC-1qXQAAhh
>>>> VW.jpg
>>>> (Can't remember where I got that - a tweet, I think. _Had_ to save it.)
>>>
>>> Error 404 - is it me or Whoosh?
>>>
>>
>> Error 404 here too!
>>
>
> The link failed to survive the line break. There's a shortened version
> at <https://tinyl.io/9OBo>, which might work better.
>

Frayed Knot :-(((

--
Toodle Pip, Mike McMillan

On 14/09/2023 17:44, Mike McMillan wrote:
> Serena Blanchflower <nospam@blanchflower.me.uk> wrote:
>> On 14/09/2023 17:12, krw wrote:
>>> On 14.9.23 17:09, Mike McMillan wrote:
>>>> J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <20OdnZ6f6tbSvZ74nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@brightview.co.uk> at Thu,
>>>>> 14 Sep 2023 16:01:34, krw <krw@whitnet.uk> writes
>>>>>> On 14.9.23 15:52, Mike McMillan wrote:
>>>>> []
>>>>>>> Nothing in the ‘body language’ stakes comes even close to a pair
>>>>>>> of dog’s
>>>>>>> eyes when they want/need something!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Especially a labrador.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Oh, I don't know:
>>>>> https://255soft.uk/temp/%5Bopening%20crisps%20in%20pub%5D%20ETBC-1qXQAAhh
>>>>> VW.jpg
>>>>> (Can't remember where I got that - a tweet, I think. _Had_ to save it.)
>>>>
>>>> Error 404 - is it me or Whoosh?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Error 404 here too!
>>>
>>
>> The link failed to survive the line break. There's a shortened version
>> at <https://tinyl.io/9OBo>, which might work better.
>>
>
> Frayed Knot :-(((
>

That's odd. If you add the VW.jpg to the end of the original url it
should work.

--
Best wishes, Serena
A man who trusts nobody is apt to be the kind of man nobody trusts
(Harold MacMillan)

Serena Blanchflower <nospam@blanchflower.me.uk> wrote:
> On 14/09/2023 17:44, Mike McMillan wrote:
>> Serena Blanchflower <nospam@blanchflower.me.uk> wrote:
>>> On 14/09/2023 17:12, krw wrote:
>>>> On 14.9.23 17:09, Mike McMillan wrote:
>>>>> J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> In message <20OdnZ6f6tbSvZ74nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@brightview.co.uk> at Thu,
>>>>>> 14 Sep 2023 16:01:34, krw <krw@whitnet.uk> writes
>>>>>>> On 14.9.23 15:52, Mike McMillan wrote:
>>>>>> []
>>>>>>>> Nothing in the ‘body language’ stakes comes even close to a pair
>>>>>>>> of dog’s
>>>>>>>> eyes when they want/need something!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Especially a labrador.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Oh, I don't know:
>>>>>> https://255soft.uk/temp/%5Bopening%20crisps%20in%20pub%5D%20ETBC-1qXQAAhh
>>>>>> VW.jpg
>>>>>> (Can't remember where I got that - a tweet, I think. _Had_ to save it.)
>>>>>
>>>>> Error 404 - is it me or Whoosh?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Error 404 here too!
>>>>
>>>
>>> The link failed to survive the line break. There's a shortened version
>>> at <https://tinyl.io/9OBo>, which might work better.
>>>
>>
>> Frayed Knot :-(((
>>
>
> That's odd. If you add the VW.jpg to the end of the original url it
> should work.
>
>

Nope :-(((

--
Toodle Pip, Mike McMillan

On Thu, 14 Sep 2023 16:09:31 -0000 (UTC), Mike McMillan <toodle.pip1@virginmedia.com>
wrote:

>J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
>> In message <20OdnZ6f6tbSvZ74nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@brightview.co.uk> at Thu,
>> 14 Sep 2023 16:01:34, krw <krw@whitnet.uk> writes
>>> On 14.9.23 15:52, Mike McMillan wrote:
>> []
>>>> Nothing in the ‘body language’ stakes comes even close to a pair
>>>> of dog’s
>>>> eyes when they want/need something!
>>>>
>>>
>>> Especially a labrador.
>>>
>> Oh, I don't know:
>> https://255soft.uk/temp/%5Bopening%20crisps%20in%20pub%5D%20ETBC-1qXQAAhh
>> VW.jpg
>> (Can't remember where I got that - a tweet, I think. _Had_ to save it.)
>
>Error 404 - is it me or Whoosh?

https://255soft.uk/temp/%5Bopening%20crisps%20in%20pub%5D%20ETBC-1qXQAAhhVW.jpg

Works here.

--
Regards, Paul Herber
https://www.paulherber.co.uk/

On Thu, 14 Sep 2023 17:19:52 +0100, Serena Blanchflower
<nospam@blanchflower.me.uk> wrote:

>On 14/09/2023 17:12, krw wrote:
>> On 14.9.23 17:09, Mike McMillan wrote:
>>> J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <20OdnZ6f6tbSvZ74nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@brightview.co.uk> at Thu,
>>>> 14 Sep 2023 16:01:34, krw <krw@whitnet.uk> writes
>>>>> On 14.9.23 15:52, Mike McMillan wrote:
>>>> []
>>>>>> Nothing in the ‘body language’ stakes comes even close to a pair
>>>>>> of dog’s
>>>>>> eyes when they want/need something!
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Especially a labrador.
>>>>>
>>>> Oh, I don't know:
>>>> https://255soft.uk/temp/%5Bopening%20crisps%20in%20pub%5D%20ETBC-1qXQAAhh
>>>> VW.jpg
>>>> (Can't remember where I got that - a tweet, I think. _Had_ to save it.)
>>>
>>> Error 404 - is it me or Whoosh?
>>>
>>
>> Error 404 here too!
>>
>
>The link failed to survive the line break. There's a shortened version
>at <https://tinyl.io/9OBo>, which might work better.
Not for me.

Paul Herber <paul@paulherber.co.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Sep 2023 16:09:31 -0000 (UTC), Mike McMillan <toodle.pip1@virginmedia.com>
> wrote:
>
>> J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <20OdnZ6f6tbSvZ74nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@brightview.co.uk> at Thu,
>>> 14 Sep 2023 16:01:34, krw <krw@whitnet.uk> writes
>>>> On 14.9.23 15:52, Mike McMillan wrote:
>>> []
>>>>> Nothing in the ‘body language’ stakes comes even close to a pair
>>>>> of dog’s
>>>>> eyes when they want/need something!
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Especially a labrador.
>>>>
>>> Oh, I don't know:
>>> https://255soft.uk/temp/%5Bopening%20crisps%20in%20pub%5D%20ETBC-1qXQAAhh
>>> VW.jpg
>>> (Can't remember where I got that - a tweet, I think. _Had_ to save it.)
>>
>> Error 404 - is it me or Whoosh?
>
> https://255soft.uk/temp/%5Bopening%20crisps%20in%20pub%5D%20ETBC-1qXQAAhhVW.jpg
>
> Works here.
>
>

Yes, that worked here too - ta muchly.

--
Toodle Pip, Mike McMillan

On Thu, 14 Sep 2023 15:44:32 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver"
<G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:

>In message <udv374$2l2el$1@dont-email.me> at Thu, 14 Sep 2023 13:52:36,
>Mike McMillan <toodle.pip1@virginmedia.com> writes
>>krw <krw@whitnet.uk> wrote:
>[]
>>> I have one which is used almost exclusively for web browsing to catch up
>>> news and more recently to play sudoku. It is useful too to use for
>>> Teams and Zoom meetings as desktop does not have a camera and for some
>>> reason I do not understand people want to watch you these days. When I
>>> made phone call I concentrated on listening.
>>>
>>
>>This is (to me at least) an interesting point KRW, I am content to
>>communicate without a picture too; whether this has anything to do with my
>>poor sight I dunno but, I find listening to a voice and concentrating on
>>what is actually being said is very informative. I know there is a lot of
>>talk about body language telling an observer a lot about the speaker and
>>their true meanings etc, but if you can’t see that body language - is it
>>really that necessary? I don’t make a lot of use of Zoom or Teams etc. but
>
>Not really.
>
>>when I do I just listen to the speaker - I don’t strain to watch them and
>>probably still not observe all the visual things going on; I say save the
>>bandwidth and use audio only!
>>
>I think partly, possibly especially since the pandemic, such meetings
>involve a lot more than the two people traditionally involved with a
>'phone call. As such, some things _are_ easier with pictures: a show of
>hands for example, and it's also a lot easier to run the meeting if you
>agree on things like raising a hand (or clicking something that does an
>equivalent electronically) if you want to speak: such meetings (we'd
>just got our laptops for the parish council in time for the pandemic,
>which was fortunate) _aren't_ as good as face-to-face ones in the same
>room.
>
>Thinking about it, when I was in work, we did indeed occasionally have
>"conference calls" over the 'phone system - audio only, but with a
>speakerphone - but those were _mostly_ with all the participants bar one
>or two in the same room, and the one or two remote. I think such a
>meeting between even as few as half a dozen individuals, all remote from
>the rest, would have been very hard work.
>
>But yes, for one to one, video is certainly not necessary. (Much as it
>isn't for a lot of TV; I have the news channel on as I'm reading and
>writing these, and only glance at it occasionally - and for dramas that
>have AD, I do much the same.) For informal things, like conversations I
>may have with cousins on another continent, I may well
>Skype/Zoom/whatever, (a) because it's actually easier (and certainly
>cheaper!), (b) there _may_ be times I want to show them something on my
>screen (which most videoconferencing software can do).

I did tai chi on zoom throughout lockdown. It was based in Kansas. I'm
doing a course of 4 more at present.

On 14/09/2023 18:05, Mike McMillan wrote:
>> That's odd. If you add the VW.jpg to the end of the original url it
>> should work.
>>
>>
> Nope :-(((

It did for me.
--
Jenny M Benson

On 14/09/2023 17:20, Jane Vernon wrote:
> Also, since I have broken my shoulder

Sorry to hear about that, Jane. I hope you are healing satisfactorily.

--
Jenny M Benson