micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote

> In comp.mobile.android, on Sat, 18 Nov 2023 08:50:42 -0500, Oscar Mayer
> <nobody@oscarmayer.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 18 Nov 2023 08:05:09 +0000, Jeff Layman wrote:
>>
>>>> I believe all/most phones require the earphone cable for an antenna.
>>>> I don't use an earphone !
>>>
>>> And I doubt that many carry wired earphones around. Even if you did,
>>> there are plenty of wireless Android earbuds around. Those would make FM
>>> unusable. I've never tried testing to see if a loose piece of insulated
>>> wire just placed in the earphone socket would act as an antenna and
>>> allow FM radio to be heard over the phone's internal speaker. Perhaps
>>> the coupling would work, but perhaps not if it needs a physical connection.
>>>
>>> I rarely use the sockets for anything, but one small advantage to not
>>> having them would be better water resistance. However, I doubt many
>>> people swim or surf with their smartphone on them, and a waterproof bag
>>> would be a more reliable choice (and a considerably cheaper one than an
>>> iPhone).
>>
>>It's for emergencies. You don't carry it around.
>>You use it when needed. Like you use a flashlight.
>
> Exactly.
>
> I keep wired earbuds in my car and in my suitcase and in my home. The
> last two are sometimes the same ones!
>
> The only problem is when the battery goes dead on the wired earbuds.
> Wait! That doesn't happen, like it does to wireless.
>>
>>In a real emergency, you will be frantic to be using that wired headphone.
>>
>>Not having the radio is like not having a flashlight when you need it.

This is what's so very strange about the Apple iKooks who think not having
something is better than having it - especially since they have to pay
twice as much for their iPhones which don't have it - and then - they ghave
to pay yet again for devices with batteries - and then they have to keep
those devices with batteries charged up in an emergency situation.

Meanwhile, those of us who are not duped by Apple into thinking that not
having FM radio is better than having it, only need to know where we put
the flashlights and wired earphones in an emergency situation.

If you see my other posts, you'll see that in California along a fault line
in a high fire danger area where the power goes out a few times a month, we
know a thing or two about being self sufficient.

An iPhone is so crippled that it can't work without buying more stuff.
Specifically, not having an FM radio is always worse than having one.

Yet Apple has convinced the iKooks that not having any basic functional
hardware is better than having basic functional hardware - which shows you
how incredibly gullible the typical Apple consumer is (and how brilliant
Apple Marketing is - they're even better than Big Tobacco).
--
You've come a long way baby... to get where you got to today...
(should be an Apple slogan instead of for Virginia Slims cigarettes).

On 2023-11-19, Wally J <walterjones@invalid.nospam> wrote:
>>
>> In a real emergency, you will be frantic to be using that wired headphone.
>>
>> Not having the radio is like not having a flashlight when you need it.
>
> This is what's so very strange about the Apple iKooks

"People who aren't scared shitless of society breaking down 24/7 to the
extent that theypitch a shit fit if their smartphones don't have FM
radio capability are iKooks, y'all. #IAmVerySmart!" 🤡

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

On 2023-11-19 11:44, Jolly Roger wrote:
> On 2023-11-19, Wally J <walterjones@invalid.nospam> wrote:
>>>
>>> In a real emergency, you will be frantic to be using that wired headphone.
>>>
>>> Not having the radio is like not having a flashlight when you need it.
>>
>> This is what's so very strange about the Apple iKooks
>
> "People who aren't scared shitless of society breaking down 24/7 to the
> extent that theypitch a shit fit if their smartphones don't have FM
> radio capability are iKooks, y'all. #IAmVerySmart!" 🤡

You would think they'd go 🍌🍌🍌 over their Android phones not having an
AM radio built in - that's much more useful in an emergency as the
transmission range is typically higher - notably at night.

Of course real preppers have real emergency radio receivers that cover
several bands, have long lasting batteries and can be charged with the
built in crank.

Many preppers have transmitters too.

Oh my! Did you see what I wrote there?

The Android phones can't transmit on radio frequencies other than the
built in cell co/WiFi/Blutooth! How will they survive when the SHTF!?!?

(It occurs to me that flat earthers are more cohernent than Wally).

--
“Markets can remain irrational longer than your can remain solvent.”
- John Maynard Keynes.

Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote

> "People who aren't scared shitless of society breaking down 24/7 to the
> extent that theypitch a shit fit if their smartphones don't have FM
> radio capability are iKooks, y'all. #IAmVerySmart!"

Hi Jolly Roger,

I study you very strange people, Jolly Roger so I understand how you feel.

Lots of people are like you and Alan Browne, Jolly Roger, who are always
making buying decisions wholly influenced by MARKETING to believe a product
that does not have basic functionality is better than one that does.

You actually believe that not having something is better than having it.
Why?
Because Marketing told you it was "courageous" to not have it.

Now you _feel_ courageous, Jolly Roger. Don't you.
*You feel so very _courageous_ not having what everyone else has*, JR.

Am I right or am I right!
--
What makes you an iKook, Jolly Roger, is not only that you believe every
word that Apple MARKETING fed you to believe - but - you defend it too.

On 2023-11-19 11:55, Wally J wrote:
> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote
>
>> "People who aren't scared shitless of society breaking down 24/7 to the
>> extent that theypitch a shit fit if their smartphones don't have FM
>> radio capability are iKooks, y'all. #IAmVerySmart!"
>
> Hi Jolly Roger,
>
> I study you very strange people, Jolly Roger so I understand how you feel.

You missed a comma in that sentence, Arlen.

Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote

> You would think they'd go ������ over their Android phones not having an
> AM radio built in - that's much more useful in an emergency as the
> transmission range is typically higher - notably at night.
>
> Of course real preppers have real emergency radio receivers that cover
> several bands, have long lasting batteries and can be charged with the
> built in crank.
>
> Many preppers have transmitters too.
>
> Oh my! Did you see what I wrote there?
>
> The Android phones can't transmit on radio frequencies other than the
> built in cell co/WiFi/Blutooth! How will they survive when the SHTF!?!?
>
> (It occurs to me that flat earthers are more cohernent than Wally).

On the basis of logic alone, no amount of MARKETING is going to convince an
intelligent person how "courageous" only Apple claims it is, for them to
remove basic functional hardware - whose loss is what cripples the iPhone.

How many _thousands_ of Israeli civilians who were inside their
safe rooms and hiding under beds in bedrooms and even some hiding inside
kitchen cabinets for half a day were there who would have given anything
for an FM radio in addition to that almost worthless iPhone without it.
--
If all they had was an iPhone with those silly earbuds, they'd be dead.

On 2023-11-19 14:01, Wally J wrote:
> Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote
>
>> You would think they'd go 頎柬綄頎柬綄頎柬綄 over their Android phones not having an
>> AM radio built in - that's much more useful in an emergency as the
>> transmission range is typically higher - notably at night.
>>
>> Of course real preppers have real emergency radio receivers that cover
>> several bands, have long lasting batteries and can be charged with the
>> built in crank.
>>
>> Many preppers have transmitters too.
>>
>> Oh my! Did you see what I wrote there?
>>
>> The Android phones can't transmit on radio frequencies other than the
>> built in cell co/WiFi/Blutooth! How will they survive when the SHTF!?!?
>>
>> (It occurs to me that flat earthers are more cohernent than Wally).
>
> On the basis of logic alone, no amount of MARKETING is going to convince an
> intelligent person how "courageous" only Apple claims it is, for them to
> remove basic functional hardware - whose loss is what cripples the iPhone.
>
> How many _thousands_ of Israeli civilians who were inside their
> safe rooms and hiding under beds in bedrooms and even some hiding inside
> kitchen cabinets for half a day were there who would have given anything
> for an FM radio in addition to that almost worthless iPhone without it.

Riiiiiiiight.

FM radio one-way communication is so much better than the two-way
communication offered by every smartphone...

On 2023-11-19 17:38, Alan wrote:
> On 2023-11-19 14:01, Wally J wrote:
>> Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote
>>
>>> You would think they'd go 頎柬綄頎柬綄頎柬綄 over their Android
>>> phones not having an
>>> AM radio built in - that's much more useful in an emergency as the
>>> transmission range is typically higher - notably at night.
>>>
>>> Of course real preppers have real emergency radio receivers that cover
>>> several bands, have long lasting batteries and can be charged with the
>>> built in crank.
>>>
>>> Many preppers have transmitters too.
>>>
>>> Oh my!    Did you see what I wrote there?
>>>
>>> The Android phones can't transmit on radio frequencies other than the
>>> built in cell co/WiFi/Blutooth!  How will they survive when the SHTF!?!?
>>>
>>> (It occurs to me that flat earthers are more cohernent than Wally).
>>
>> On the basis of logic alone, no amount of MARKETING is going to
>> convince an
>> intelligent person how "courageous" only Apple claims it is, for them to
>> remove basic functional hardware - whose loss is what cripples the
>> iPhone.
>>
>> How many _thousands_ of Israeli civilians who were inside their
>> safe rooms and hiding under beds in bedrooms and even some hiding inside
>> kitchen cabinets for half a day were there who would have given anything
>> for an FM radio in addition to that almost worthless iPhone without it.
>
> Riiiiiiiight.
>
> FM radio one-way communication is so much better than the two-way
> communication offered by every smartphone...

It's amusing how far sideways it goes to die on the hill of its
ridiculous position.

--
“Markets can remain irrational longer than your can remain solvent.”
- John Maynard Keynes.

Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> On 2023-11-19, Wally J <walterjones@invalid.nospam> wrote:
>>>
>>> In a real emergency, you will be frantic to be using that wired headphone.
>>>
>>> Not having the radio is like not having a flashlight when you need it.
>>
>> This is what's so very strange about the Apple iKooks
>
> "People who aren't scared shitless of society breaking down 24/7 to the
> extent that theypitch a shit fit if their smartphones don't have FM
> radio capability are iKooks, y'all. #IAmVerySmart!" 🤡
>
I could give a shit less about the aux jack but FM radio doesn’t sound like
a horrible idea. I’ve listened to FM radio zero seconds per year for
forever, but ifartradio might stop working if the zombies arise.

Wally J <walterjones@invalid.nospam> wrote:
> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote
>
>> "People who aren't scared shitless of society breaking down 24/7 to the
>> extent that theypitch a shit fit if their smartphones don't have FM
>> radio capability are iKooks, y'all. #IAmVerySmart!"
>
> Hi Jolly Roger,
>
> I study you very strange people, Jolly Roger so I understand how you feel.
>
> Lots of people are like you and Alan Browne, Jolly Roger, who are always
> making buying decisions wholly influenced by MARKETING to believe a product
> that does not have basic functionality is better than one that does.
>
> You actually believe that not having something is better than having it.
> Why?
> Because Marketing told you it was "courageous" to not have it.
>
> Now you _feel_ courageous, Jolly Roger. Don't you.
> *You feel so very _courageous_ not having what everyone else has*, JR.
>
> Am I right or am I right!

I have access to FM radio in my car, my home entertainment center, a
neglected boombox and maybe a few devices I long forgot about. I still
don’t listen to FM or AM for that matter. Last I cared AM was infested by
political kooks. FM got taken over by love sponges. So functional.

Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
> On 2023-11-19 14:01, Wally J wrote:
>> Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote
>>
>>> You would think they'd go 頎柬綄頎柬綄頎柬綄 over their Android phones not having an
>>> AM radio built in - that's much more useful in an emergency as the
>>> transmission range is typically higher - notably at night.
>>>
>>> Of course real preppers have real emergency radio receivers that cover
>>> several bands, have long lasting batteries and can be charged with the
>>> built in crank.
>>>
>>> Many preppers have transmitters too.
>>>
>>> Oh my! Did you see what I wrote there?
>>>
>>> The Android phones can't transmit on radio frequencies other than the
>>> built in cell co/WiFi/Blutooth! How will they survive when the SHTF!?!?
>>>
>>> (It occurs to me that flat earthers are more cohernent than Wally).
>>
>> On the basis of logic alone, no amount of MARKETING is going to convince an
>> intelligent person how "courageous" only Apple claims it is, for them to
>> remove basic functional hardware - whose loss is what cripples the iPhone.
>>
>> How many _thousands_ of Israeli civilians who were inside their
>> safe rooms and hiding under beds in bedrooms and even some hiding inside
>> kitchen cabinets for half a day were there who would have given anything
>> for an FM radio in addition to that almost worthless iPhone without it.
>
> Riiiiiiiight.
>
> FM radio one-way communication is so much better than the two-way
> communication offered by every smartphone...
>
Emergency management on Shitter worked ok before sociopathic manbaby took
over with his flamethrower. Without an account trying to keep up to date
with Shitter is a joke. Is it any better with an account? Nationalize that
shit as a public resource.

*Hemidactylus* <ecphoric@allspamis.invalid> wrote

> I have access to FM radio in my car, my home entertainment center, a
> neglected boombox and maybe a few devices I long forgot about. I still
> don't listen to FM or AM for that matter. Last I cared AM was infested by
> political kooks. FM got taken over by love sponges. So functional.

Hi Hemidactylus,

When you need FM and you don't have it, that's when you're going to care.

Besides, the adult point I was making to Jolly Roger, because I understand
him, is that he *feels courageous* owning a phone missing basic features.

Owning nothing makes Jolly Roger feel "special" to be able to say...

*I bought an iPhone that was missing the most basic functionality*
*And I feel _courageous_ about doing that*

The question is _why_ does Jolly Roger feel so "courageous" about that.
Do you know why?

I do.

On 2023-11-19, Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
> On 2023-11-19 11:44, Jolly Roger wrote:
>> On 2023-11-19, Wally J <walterjones@invalid.nospam> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> In a real emergency, you will be frantic to be using that wired headphone.
>>>>
>>>> Not having the radio is like not having a flashlight when you need it.
>>>
>>> This is what's so very strange about the Apple iKooks
>>
>> "People who aren't scared shitless of society breaking down 24/7 to the
>> extent that theypitch a shit fit if their smartphones don't have FM
>> radio capability are iKooks, y'all. #IAmVerySmart!" 🤡
>
> You would think they'd go 🍌🍌🍌 over their Android phones not having an
> AM radio built in - that's much more useful in an emergency as the
> transmission range is typically higher - notably at night.

"No, that's different." 🤡

> Of course real preppers have real emergency radio receivers that cover
> several bands, have long lasting batteries and can be charged with the
> built in crank.
>
> Many preppers have transmitters too.
>
> Oh my! Did you see what I wrote there?
>
> The Android phones can't transmit on radio frequencies other than the
> built in cell co/WiFi/Blutooth! How will they survive when the SHTF!?!?
>
> (It occurs to me that flat earthers are more cohernent than Wally).

Not surprisingly so.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

On 2023-11-20, *Hemidactylus* <ecphoric@allspamis.invalid> wrote:
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>> On 2023-11-19 14:01, Wally J wrote:
>>> Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote
>>>
>>>> You would think they'd go 頎柬綄頎柬綄頎柬綄 over their Android
>>>> phones not having an AM radio built in - that's much more useful in
>>>> an emergency as the transmission range is typically higher -
>>>> notably at night.
>>>>
>>>> Of course real preppers have real emergency radio receivers that
>>>> cover several bands, have long lasting batteries and can be charged
>>>> with the built in crank.
>>>>
>>>> Many preppers have transmitters too.
>>>>
>>>> Oh my! Did you see what I wrote there?
>>>>
>>>> The Android phones can't transmit on radio frequencies other than
>>>> the built in cell co/WiFi/Blutooth! How will they survive when the
>>>> SHTF!?!?
>>>>
>>>> (It occurs to me that flat earthers are more cohernent than Wally).
>>>
>>> On the basis of logic alone, no amount of MARKETING is going to
>>> convince an intelligent person how "courageous" only Apple claims it
>>> is, for them to remove basic functional hardware - whose loss is
>>> what cripples the iPhone.
>>>
>>> How many _thousands_ of Israeli civilians who were inside their safe
>>> rooms and hiding under beds in bedrooms and even some hiding inside
>>> kitchen cabinets for half a day were there who would have given
>>> anything for an FM radio in addition to that almost worthless iPhone
>>> without it.
>>
>> Riiiiiiiight.
>>
>> FM radio one-way communication is so much better than the two-way
>> communication offered by every smartphone...
>>
> Emergency management on Shitter worked ok before sociopathic manbaby
> took over with his flamethrower. Without an account trying to keep up
> to date with Shitter is a joke. Is it any better with an account?
> Nationalize that shit as a public resource.

I much prefer watching it go down in flames. Plus winter is here, and
flames keep us warm. 🙂

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

On 2023-11-20, *Hemidactylus* <ecphoric@allspamis.invalid> wrote:
> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>>
>> "People who aren't scared shitless of society breaking down 24/7 to
>> the extent that theypitch a shit fit if their smartphones don't have
>> FM radio capability are iKooks, y'all. #IAmVerySmart!" 🤡
>>
> I could give a shit less about the aux jack but FM radio doesn’t sound
> like a horrible idea. I’ve listened to FM radio zero seconds per year
> for forever, but ifartradio might stop working if the zombies arise.

There are dedicated radios that are much more functional and have way
better range. They also cost way less, and can be used without
electricity. I see no need for this feature in a smartphone that has
limited battery runtime and range. But if you do, go ahead and buy one
that has it. You do you.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

*Hemidactylus* wrote on Mon, 20 Nov 2023 01:51:24 +0000 :

> I could give a shit less about the aux jack but FM radio doesn't sound like
> a horrible idea. I've listened to FM radio zero seconds per year for
> forever, but ifartradio might stop working if the zombies arise.

It would be nice to be able to double and triple the memory on an iPhone
just by inserting a card, just as it would be nice to be able to listen to
music without having to worry about a tiny battery going dead, just as it
would be nice to be able to tune in to a radio when there isn't Internet.

*Hemidactylus* wrote:
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>> On 2023-11-19 14:01, Wally J wrote:
>>> Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote
>>>
>>>> You would think they'd go 頎柬綄頎柬綄頎柬綄 over their Android phones not having an
>>>> AM radio built in - that's much more useful in an emergency as the
>>>> transmission range is typically higher - notably at night.
>>>>
>>>> Of course real preppers have real emergency radio receivers that cover
>>>> several bands, have long lasting batteries and can be charged with the
>>>> built in crank.
>>>>
>>>> Many preppers have transmitters too.
>>>>
>>>> Oh my! Did you see what I wrote there?
>>>>
>>>> The Android phones can't transmit on radio frequencies other than the
>>>> built in cell co/WiFi/Blutooth! How will they survive when the SHTF!?!?
>>>>
>>>> (It occurs to me that flat earthers are more cohernent than Wally).
>>>
>>> On the basis of logic alone, no amount of MARKETING is going to convince an
>>> intelligent person how "courageous" only Apple claims it is, for them to
>>> remove basic functional hardware - whose loss is what cripples the iPhone.
>>>
>>> How many _thousands_ of Israeli civilians who were inside their
>>> safe rooms and hiding under beds in bedrooms and even some hiding inside
>>> kitchen cabinets for half a day were there who would have given anything
>>> for an FM radio in addition to that almost worthless iPhone without it.
>>
>> Riiiiiiiight.
>>
>> FM radio one-way communication is so much better than the two-way
>> communication offered by every smartphone...
>>
> Emergency management on Shitter worked ok before sociopathic manbaby took
> over with his flamethrower. Without an account trying to keep up to date
> with Shitter is a joke. Is it any better with an account? Nationalize that
> shit as a public resource.
>

Sounds good to me! Since the First Amendment would then apply, Andrew Anglin
and Nick Fuentes will promptly have their accounts unbanned.

On 2023-11-20 19:45, Anonymous wrote:
> *Hemidactylus* wrote:
>> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>> On 2023-11-19 14:01, Wally J wrote:
>>>> Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote
>>>>
>>>>> You would think they'd go 頎柬綄頎柬綄頎柬綄 over their Android phones not having an
>>>>> AM radio built in - that's much more useful in an emergency as the
>>>>> transmission range is typically higher - notably at night.
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course real preppers have real emergency radio receivers that cover
>>>>> several bands, have long lasting batteries and can be charged with the
>>>>> built in crank.
>>>>>
>>>>> Many preppers have transmitters too.
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh my! Did you see what I wrote there?
>>>>>
>>>>> The Android phones can't transmit on radio frequencies other than the
>>>>> built in cell co/WiFi/Blutooth! How will they survive when the SHTF!?!?
>>>>>
>>>>> (It occurs to me that flat earthers are more cohernent than Wally).
>>>>
>>>> On the basis of logic alone, no amount of MARKETING is going to convince an
>>>> intelligent person how "courageous" only Apple claims it is, for them to
>>>> remove basic functional hardware - whose loss is what cripples the iPhone.
>>>>
>>>> How many _thousands_ of Israeli civilians who were inside their
>>>> safe rooms and hiding under beds in bedrooms and even some hiding inside
>>>> kitchen cabinets for half a day were there who would have given anything
>>>> for an FM radio in addition to that almost worthless iPhone without it.
>>>
>>> Riiiiiiiight.
>>>
>>> FM radio one-way communication is so much better than the two-way
>>> communication offered by every smartphone...
>>>
>> Emergency management on Shitter worked ok before sociopathic manbaby took
>> over with his flamethrower. Without an account trying to keep up to date
>> with Shitter is a joke. Is it any better with an account? Nationalize that
>> shit as a public resource.
>>
>
> Sounds good to me! Since the First Amendment would then apply, Andrew Anglin
> and Nick Fuentes will promptly have their accounts unbanned.

You get that private businesses are not bound by the first amendment, right?

Dave Royal <dave@dave123royal.com> wrote

> Wally, could you do those of us using newsreaders on small devices a
> favour and make all your subject lines shorter, so they're comprehensible
> when truncated?

No problem. How many max characters do you prefer?

BTW, I'm an old man, where I'm on something like a dozen forums, where
almost always the problem is people write titles which are too short, e.g.,
Help!
My phone is broken
Why doesn't anything work?
etc.

> 'As of November 2023' is superfluous.
> 'Android models' > Androids
> 'Portable memory slot' - SD card?

I don't do anything by accident... everything has a reason (even my pencils
are standing UP in the cup while the pens and markers are placed downward).

There are explicit reasons for each of those, which I'll bother to explain
since I can't blame you for not understanding the dynamics of these groups.

The title is long for multiple reasons:
a. Just as scientific paper titles are long, it's there for a good reason
b. And peculiar to Usenet, it's there to prevent derailing of the topic

Bear in mind, I am well aware people (especially the child-like iOS users)
will purposefully deflect any thread topic that covers facts they hate.
If you don't believe me - look at any post from nospam. These deflectors do
this inside the thread bodies but if the title explicitly contains key
elements of the facts that are being proposed for discussion, it's harder
for them to derail a thread by their brazen denials & whataboutism tactics.

1. 'As of November 2023' is there because the iKooks mostly, but there are
other naysayers, will claim that the data is old - and when we run a
search, it will be later so the numbers will change over time. So it
nails down the date (if you don't believe me, go to the Apple newsgroups
and watch how they squirm and deny all facts based on the date that the
DxoMark smartphone camera surveys were done). The date was explicitly
placed there to prevent the deniers from claiming cherry picking dates.

2. 'Android models' is there because the deniers will claim (like Steve
much later in this thread already did) that the statistics are
different for the Android phones sold versus the models offered.
While I agree with that assessment of fact, I have no data for the
number of Android phones sold - I only have the models offered.
You may note that people already denied this by claiming that I
used a time period of "forever" (which is wrong - they didn't even
read the thread) so I probably should have _added_ information,
such as the fact that it's from 2019 to 2023 and future models.

3. 'Portable memory slot' is there because the people who hate portable
memory always claim it's only for _expansion memory_ (which is
completely different than portable memory. It's not obvious to
almost everyone that there is a _huge difference_ between expansion
memory (which is rarely needed nowadays) and portable memory
(which has huge advantages that phones sans slots just can't do).

Note each and every one of things you thought were "superfluous" are there
simply because I'm extremely experienced in Usenet arguments where people
who want to deny facts always attack those facts like kindergarten children
attack each other.

In summary, I put the date there, and the fact that it's not units sold,
but models sold, and the fact that the sd card is unique when it's used for
portable memory to stave off the inevitable childish deniers.

We _still_ had iKooks brazenly deny all the facts - but no matter how they
try to derail the thread topic, the title remains the point of discussion.
--
In Usenet, you can't please everyone but you can at least understand their
concerns and address them at the same time fulfilling the strategic goals.

On 2023-11-21, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
> On 2023-11-20 19:45, Anonymous wrote:
>> *Hemidactylus* wrote:
>>> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2023-11-19 14:01, Wally J wrote:
>>>>> Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote
>>>>>
>>>>>> You would think they'd go 頎柬綄頎柬綄頎柬綄 over their Android
>>>>>> phones not having an AM radio built in - that's much more useful
>>>>>> in an emergency as the transmission range is typically higher -
>>>>>> notably at night.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course real preppers have real emergency radio receivers that
>>>>>> cover several bands, have long lasting batteries and can be
>>>>>> charged with the built in crank.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Many preppers have transmitters too.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Oh my! Did you see what I wrote there?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The Android phones can't transmit on radio frequencies other than
>>>>>> the built in cell co/WiFi/Blutooth! How will they survive when
>>>>>> the SHTF!?!?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (It occurs to me that flat earthers are more cohernent than
>>>>>> Wally).
>>>>>
>>>>> On the basis of logic alone, no amount of MARKETING is going to
>>>>> convince an intelligent person how "courageous" only Apple claims
>>>>> it is, for them to remove basic functional hardware - whose loss
>>>>> is what cripples the iPhone.
>>>>>
>>>>> How many _thousands_ of Israeli civilians who were inside their
>>>>> safe rooms and hiding under beds in bedrooms and even some hiding
>>>>> inside kitchen cabinets for half a day were there who would have
>>>>> given anything for an FM radio in addition to that almost
>>>>> worthless iPhone without it.
>>>>
>>>> Riiiiiiiight.
>>>>
>>>> FM radio one-way communication is so much better than the two-way
>>>> communication offered by every smartphone...
>>>>
>>> Emergency management on Shitter worked ok before sociopathic manbaby
>>> took over with his flamethrower. Without an account trying to keep
>>> up to date with Shitter is a joke. Is it any better with an account?
>>> Nationalize that shit as a public resource.
>>
>> Sounds good to me! Since the First Amendment would then apply, Andrew
>> Anglin and Nick Fuentes will promptly have their accounts unbanned.
>
> You get that private businesses are not bound by the first amendment,
> right?

These dip shit unAmerican smooth brains don't care about pesky things
like the Constitution enough to understand it. Like everything else,
they are only interested in using it as a weapon against "ThoSe FiLtHy
LeFTiSt ScUm!1!".

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote

>> However, to explain... I was taught to document using long titles.
>> My Subject is long for the same reason scientific paper titles are long.
>
> Paper titles aren't long, they average 12.3 words.
> https://blog.oup.com/2018/09/efficient-titles-research-articles/

Hi Chris,
That's interesting. Thanks for digging that up.

I am always logical and sensible because I base everything on facts
so, unlike the uneducated iKooks, I agree with anyone who makes sense.

I've also published scientific papers (I was only a contributing scientist
though - as it was during my graduate school research in my first field)
so I was taught by professors how to author peer-reviewed papers.

In keeping with always making sense...
1. I instantly agreed with Andy & Dave (& asked them for a line length)
2. I explained the reason for explicit titles was two-fold...
a. It's intended to be found with a typical keyword search, and,
b. It's intended to stave off the crazies (you know who they are).

> Titles need to be succinct and meaningful.
> This thread's OP certainly isn't.

Again, thanks for that critique of the thread title.

Bear in mind this is a Usenet thread, so while I always employ what I was
taught in graduate school (mostly for my first graduate degree), I didn't
spend years writing the thread title up so it's off the cuff (ad hoc).

Mainly the title is the way it is for two fundamental reasons given the
peculiar nature of a Usenet thread and the foibles of the search engine.
A. A "control F" in a keyword search easily jumps from title to title, &
B. To forestall the child-like cherry pickers (like Steve & nospam).

>> So they can be found in a title search on an automated web archive, e.g.,
>> <http://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android>
>
> Google searches much more than titles.

Thank you for letting me know that, where there are two Google engines:
1. Google search (i.e., google.com)
2. Google Usenet search (i.e., groups.google.com)

They're completely different.

Remember, I _created_ these URLs (e.g., the tinyurl) and I worked with the
Google team long ago to _simplify_ the old-style URLs to the new style.

OLD:
<http://tinyurl.com/misc-phone-mobile-iphone>
<http://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/misc.phone.mobile.iphone>
NEW:
<http://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone>

Trust me - it's not easy to get in touch with a specific person in
Mountainview (if you haven't tried it - ask Andy Burns what it's like).

I spent many hours trying to help people like you and Andy and Dave _find_
articles that are posted on Usenet given that the "normal" google search
doesn't do a good job at all in finding articles based on keywords.

But once you find articles, the Google Usenet search engine doesn't have a
TITLE option so what you do is "control+F" and "F3" to skip to the next.

For _that_, you need the keyword in the title, Chris.

Remember, nothing I do is by accident.
Everything is well thought out and logical and sensible and defensible.

But you can't please everyone.
No matter how hard you may try.

BTW, the narkive also needs the Control+F and F3 title keyword search:
<http://misc.phone.mobile.iphone.narkive.com>

>> It's not worth doing all the immense efforts I do in any given thread to
>> document things (URLs, facts, APKs, screenshots, etc.) unless leveraged.
>>
>> However, I can make titles shorter if that's what people want.
>> How many characters do you prefer?
>
> 10-12 words is the recommendation for papers. No reason why your posts
> should be any longer than that.

I'm OK with that suggestion as I'm eminently reasonable in all ways.
Everything I do is by design where you are the customer in many ways.

Thank you for adding value to the discussion where I'm always happy to
oblige any reasonable request as my goal is to be purposefully helpful.
--
On Usenet, you need to be reasonable and rational as many people aren't.

Dave Royal <dave@dave123royal.com> wrote

> I don't know what other people want. I think the subject should be as long
> as it needs to be, but no longer. Take a critical look at it: is it
> concise, can you delete words without losing anything important, or use
> well-known (for the NG) abbreviations?
>
> Be aware that mobile newsreaders may truncate the subject in the middle -
> see screenshot of PiaoHong on a this 10" tablet. Mine does the same.
>
> <https://www.cjoint.com/data/MKvqGGSDy5v_Screenshot-20231121-163021-NewsReader.jpg>
> And I have a tablet; I don't know what it looks like on a phone. So don't
> waste the first few words. It's like writing a good newspaper headline.
>
> Just my view. If I don't know what it's about I don't bother to tap on it.

Hi Dave,

Thanks for that helpful information.

I'll always agree with a sensible point of view where you backed up your
point of view which I can't at all disagree with in any way (and thank you
for the examples as I read my news using telnet scripts on a huge monitor).

Mainly I have long titles for search reasons and to discourage the crazies
from overly deflecting the thread intent (e.g., look at nospam's content).

The crazies like nospam, Jolly Roger, Alan Browne, Alan Baker, Lewis, Snit,
et al., all _hate_ that their expensive toy iPhones are crippled garbage.

They hate that their iPhones are garbage so much that they literally deny
all facts about the iPhone - which is the strangest thing to behold.

In order to make up for the fact that the iPhone is crippled garbage, they
even brazenly fabricate imaginary functionality - time and time again.

Why do they do that?
I study them. I think I know why.

Literally, they _hate_ the fact it's so easy to show the iPhone is crap.

They made a herd decision based on Apple marketing alone (which, I admit,
is brilliant marketing - even better than Big Tobacco was with Virginia
Slims) - and - all they want is affirmation of their herd decision.

That means they don't want to hear facts.
They only want to hear about YELLOW iPhones. (Wow. Way cool. How fancy!).

Whenever you see an Apple advertisement, each one shows that Apple thinks
their customer is incredibly stupid (NEW GLASS!!!! NEW TITANIUM!!!!).

Who falls for that crap?
Only people who believe it, right?

The purpose of this thread was simply to provide _facts_ to those crazies.
And of course I know they don't want to hear any of these facts.

They hate facts.
They want all facts to go away (hell, they want _me_ to go away!). :)

So that's why the title had to have the main argument that they could not
deflect from because the assessment in the title is based on the facts.

Not on fancy Apple marketing (which is all the iKooks want to hear about).
(Did you hear Apple made a new RED!!!!!!!! iPhone. Way cool huh!!!!!!)

Bear in mind I didn't spend an hour on the title like I might with a
scientific paper's title - but in the words of Clemens (was it he?),
"If you want it shorter - that will take much longer to do."

In other words, I'll spend a bit more time honing the subject when it's one
of those threads (like this one is) which people _hate_ because they own an
imaginary belief system that things these hardware features are long gone.

These crazies fight tooth-and-nail to make all facts they hate go away.

Yet, the fact is, most Android models recently sold have these basic
features, and any phone without them, is crippled in terms of what it does.

There's _nothing_ a phone without them can do that a phone with them can't.
--
On Usenet, I'm a rarity in that I am always logical & sensible, & as such,
I will agree with anyone who makes sensible comments, no matter their nym.

Alan wrote:
> On 2023-11-20 19:45, Anonymous wrote:
>> *Hemidactylus* wrote:
>>> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2023-11-19 14:01, Wally J wrote:
>>>>> Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote
>>>>>
>>>>>> You would think they'd go 頎柬綄頎柬綄頎柬綄 over their Android phones not
>>>>>> having an
>>>>>> AM radio built in - that's much more useful in an emergency as the
>>>>>> transmission range is typically higher - notably at night.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course real preppers have real emergency radio receivers that cover
>>>>>> several bands, have long lasting batteries and can be charged with the
>>>>>> built in crank.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Many preppers have transmitters too.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Oh my!    Did you see what I wrote there?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The Android phones can't transmit on radio frequencies other than the
>>>>>> built in cell co/WiFi/Blutooth!  How will they survive when the SHTF!?!?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (It occurs to me that flat earthers are more cohernent than Wally).
>>>>>
>>>>> On the basis of logic alone, no amount of MARKETING is going to convince an
>>>>> intelligent person how "courageous" only Apple claims it is, for them to
>>>>> remove basic functional hardware - whose loss is what cripples the iPhone.
>>>>>
>>>>> How many _thousands_ of Israeli civilians who were inside their
>>>>> safe rooms and hiding under beds in bedrooms and even some hiding inside
>>>>> kitchen cabinets for half a day were there who would have given anything
>>>>> for an FM radio in addition to that almost worthless iPhone without it.
>>>>
>>>> Riiiiiiiight.
>>>>
>>>> FM radio one-way communication is so much better than the two-way
>>>> communication offered by every smartphone...
>>>>
>>> Emergency management on Shitter worked ok before sociopathic manbaby took
>>> over with his flamethrower. Without an account trying to keep up to date
>>> with Shitter is a joke. Is it any better with an account? Nationalize that
>>> shit as a public resource.
>>>
>>
>> Sounds good to me! Since the First Amendment would then apply, Andrew Anglin
>> and Nick Fuentes will promptly have their accounts unbanned.
>
> You get that private businesses are not bound by the first amendment, right?

After nationalization it wouldn't be a private business, now would it?