Cross-posted to a Linux and a Win7 Newsgroup ... I don't have an iOS
newsgroup.

"US launches landmark lawsuit against Apple"

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-03-22/us-launches-landmark-lawsuit-against-apple/103620506

Whilst listening to the Radio (in Australia) discussing this story this
afternoon, the point was made that, on Phones, Apple's iOS has something
like a 60% market share in the U.S. of A.

However, on a Worldwide basis .....

https://www.statista.com/statistics/272698/global-market-share-held-by-mobile-operating-systems-since-2009/

Quote "Android maintained its position as the leading mobile operating
system worldwide in the fourth quarter of 2023 with a market share of
70.1 percent. Android's closest rival, Apple's iOS, had a market share
of 29.2 percent during the same period." End Quote

Why is there such a drastic difference between 'With-in U.S. of A.'
stats and 'Worldwide' stats?? i.e. almost an inversion!
--
Daniel

On 22/03/2024 in message <utjj91$2rf05$1@dont-email.me> Daniel65 wrote:

>Cross-posted to a Linux and a Win7 Newsgroup ... I don't have an iOS
>newsgroup.
>
>"US launches landmark lawsuit against Apple"
>
>https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-03-22/us-launches-landmark-lawsuit-against-apple/103620506
>
>Whilst listening to the Radio (in Australia) discussing this story this
>afternoon, the point was made that, on Phones, Apple's iOS has something
>like a 60% market share in the U.S. of A.
>
>However, on a Worldwide basis .....
>
>https://www.statista.com/statistics/272698/global-market-share-held-by-mobile-operating-systems-since-2009/
>
>Quote "Android maintained its position as the leading mobile operating
>system worldwide in the fourth quarter of 2023 with a market share of 70.1
>percent. Android's closest rival, Apple's iOS, had a market share of 29.2
>percent during the same period." End Quote
>
>Why is there such a drastic difference between 'With-in U.S. of A.' stats
>and 'Worldwide' stats?? i.e. almost an inversion!

Americans are naively patriotic and many of them don't understand there
are other countries in the world. There is a story that at the first
lesson of trainee airline pilots in the US about 14% (on average) of the
trainees have to be taken to a mental hospital to recover when they are
told there are other countries in the world they will need to fly to.

--
Jeff Gaines Dorset UK
Those are my principles – and if you don’t like them, well, I have
others.
(Groucho Marx)

"Daniel65" <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote

| Whilst listening to the Radio (in Australia) discussing this story this
| afternoon, the point was made that, on Phones, Apple's iOS has something
| like a 60% market share in the U.S. of A.
|

It may be true. But those stats are from statcounter. So
it's really a record of what cellphone is used by people who visit
commercial websites with statcounter tracking and don't block
it.

Apple devotees are less likely to care about privacy, more
likely to be wealthy. That may account for part of the stats.
(I've been blocking statcounter in my HOSTS file for as long
as I can remember. Do extensions like ublock origin block it?
I don't know.)

Apple's own disciple-run website says the US share is in the
30s and generally going down:
https://9to5mac.com/2023/10/18/apples-us-smartphone-market-share-39-percent/

Where do they get their stats? I don't know. Maybe they're
counting sales, rather than cellphones visiting statcounter
websites? I don't see anyplace where they even explain their
numbers! Then again, AppleSeeds don't care. They just want
to hear that their religion is growing.

It's become common knowledge in the US that iPhone text
messages show as blue bubbles whereas if an Android sends a
text to an iPhone it's green. Ick! Gross ick factor!

Apple blocks efforts to change the bubble color because they
want to promote Apple as a status symbol. Similarly, they
deliberately interfere with anything that might mean an AppleSeed
being able to interact with non-Apple products.

On dating sites, a green bubble is often enough to disqualify
someone from consideration -- like a young man who picks up
his date in a rusted Ford Fiesta. Who wants to date an icky
Android prole?

US culture tends to be very status-conscious. People spend
big money for iPhones, BMWs, etc. The more alienated people
become, the more the person is the logos. Many people walk
around festooned with logos, on their coats, shoes, shirts,
handbags, glasses... Apple have always
pushed a "premium brand" image. People don't mind paying
through the nose. Just as with BMW, it's not so much the product
per se as it is the logo that they buy.

On the other hand, Apple does make solid products. Their products
are also relatively easy to use by people with little tech aptitude.
They're stable, dependable, beautifully built, and soprt iconss that
look like they were designed by a 12 year old girl who dots her
i's with hearts. Cute as a button and fancy as a BMW.

And as the US lawsuit indicates, Apple are vicious in their competitive,
monopolistic practices and their exploitation of both customers
and the virtual slave labor force that produces their products. So
their tech-illiterate customers are reasonable in thinking that nothing
but Mac works well. Because if it's not Mac then it doesn't work
well on a Mac.

Flaky GenZ moralists won't buy a brand if the CEO has said something
critical of "trans" people, but they'll happily share the CEO "cancel
gossip"
on their slave-built iPhone. That's a big part of the Apple mystery.
How do they manage to maintain an image as a cute company,
year after year, while arguably being one of the nastiest companies
to ever exist?

The other mystery is why it's taken over two decades for law
enforcement to look into Apple's practices. There's no secret
there. Yet suddenly everyone's worked up. Perhaps it's because
no one cared about consumer protection, but they do care if
Epic Games, PayPal and various other corporate entities that are
suffering lost profits? And why aren't they looking into Google's similar
exploitive practices? Why is it impossible to simply buy a
cellphone that's not controlled by the OS provider? My TV doesn't
force me to watch CBS TV. My car doesn't limit the supermarkets
I can drive to.

Jeff Gaines wrote on 22/3/24 9:08 pm:
> On 22/03/2024 in message <utjj91$2rf05$1@dont-email.me> Daniel65
> wrote:
>
>> Cross-posted to a Linux and a Win7 Newsgroup ... I don't have an
>> iOS newsgroup.
>>
>> "US launches landmark lawsuit against Apple"
>>
>> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-03-22/us-launches-landmark-lawsuit-against-apple/103620506
>>
>> Whilst listening to the Radio (in Australia) discussing this story
>> this afternoon, the point was made that, on Phones, Apple's iOS
>> has something like a 60% market share in the U.S. of A.
>>
>> However, on a Worldwide basis .....
>>
>> https://www.statista.com/statistics/272698/global-market-share-held-by-mobile-operating-systems-since-2009/
>>
>> Quote "Android maintained its position as the leading mobile
>> operating system worldwide in the fourth quarter of 2023 with a
>> market share of 70.1 percent. Android's closest rival, Apple's iOS,
>> had a market share of 29.2 percent during the same period." End
>> Quote
>>
>> Why is there such a drastic difference between 'With-in U.S. of A.'
>> stats and 'Worldwide' stats?? i.e. almost an inversion!
>
> Americans are naively patriotic and many of them don't understand
> there are other countries in the world.

Yeap ... and, as I understand it, to some U.S.A.'ians only 'the lower 48
states' count .... but I expect the vast majority of Apple iOS phones
are produced elsewhere (China/Taiwan/Mexico/where-ever) just like the
other phones so, to me, that still doesn't explain the situation.

> There is a story that at the first lesson of trainee airline pilots
> in the US about 14% (on average) of the trainees have to be taken to
> a mental hospital to recover when they are told there are other
> countries in the world they will need to fly to.
>
Could that suggest there is a problem with U.S. of A. schooling
(Geography) even at what, as I understand it, they called the Elementary
School level??
--
Daniel

Newyana2 wrote on 22/3/24 11:16 pm:
> "Daniel65" <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote
>
>> Whilst listening to the Radio (in Australia) discussing this story
>> this afternoon, the point was made that, on Phones, Apple's iOS has
>> something like a 60% market share in the U.S. of A.
>>
> It may be true. But those stats are from statcounter. So it's really
> a record of what cellphone is used by people who visit commercial
> websites with statcounter tracking and don't block it.

o are you suggesting this might be a case of "Lies, Damned Lies and
Statistics!!"??

> Apple devotees are less likely to care about privacy, more likely to
> be wealthy. That may account for part of the stats. (I've been
> blocking statcounter in my HOSTS file for as long as I can remember.
> Do extensions like ublock origin block it? I don't know.)
>
> Apple's own disciple-run website says the US share is in the 30s and
> generally going down:
> https://9to5mac.com/2023/10/18/apples-us-smartphone-market-share-39-percent/
>
> Where do they get their stats? I don't know. Maybe they're counting
> sales, rather than cellphones visiting statcounter websites? I don't
> see anyplace where they even explain their numbers! Then again,
> AppleSeeds don't care. They just want to hear that their religion is
> growing.
>
> It's become common knowledge in the US that iPhone text messages show
> as blue bubbles whereas if an Android sends a text to an iPhone it's
> green. Ick! Gross ick factor!

Could this, possibly lead to messages from Android Phones (no Blue tick)
being delayed in their 'reception' (i.e. time to being displayed) in iOS
type phones??

> Apple blocks efforts to change the bubble color because they want to
> promote Apple as a status symbol. Similarly, they deliberately
> interfere with anything that might mean an AppleSeed being able to
> interact with non-Apple products.
>
> On dating sites, a green bubble is often enough to disqualify someone
> from consideration -- like a young man who picks up his date in a
> rusted Ford Fiesta. Who wants to date an icky Android prole?
>
> US culture tends to be very status-conscious. People spend big money
> for iPhones, BMWs, etc. The more alienated people become, the more
> the person is the logos. Many people walk around festooned with
> logos, on their coats, shoes, shirts, handbags, glasses... Apple have
> always pushed a "premium brand" image. People don't mind paying
> through the nose. Just as with BMW, it's not so much the product per
> se as it is the logo that they buy.

So the Customer is paying to do the advertising for whichever company!!

> On the other hand, Apple does make solid products. Their products are
> also relatively easy to use by people with little tech aptitude.
> They're stable, dependable, beautifully built, and soprt iconss that
> look like they were designed by a 12 year old girl who dots her i's
> with hearts. Cute as a button and fancy as a BMW.
>
> And as the US lawsuit indicates, Apple are vicious in their
> competitive, monopolistic practices and their exploitation of both
> customers and the virtual slave labor force that produces their
> products. So their tech-illiterate customers are reasonable in
> thinking that nothing but Mac works well. Because if it's not Mac
> then it doesn't work well on a Mac.
>
> Flaky GenZ moralists won't buy a brand if the CEO has said something
> critical of "trans" people, but they'll happily share the CEO
> "cancel gossip" on their slave-built iPhone. That's a big part of the
> Apple mystery. How do they manage to maintain an image as a cute
> company, year after year, while arguably being one of the nastiest
> companies to ever exist?
>
> The other mystery is why it's taken over two decades for law
> enforcement to look into Apple's practices. There's no secret there.
> Yet suddenly everyone's worked up. Perhaps it's because no one cared
> about consumer protection, but they do care if Epic Games, PayPal and
> various other corporate entities that are suffering lost profits? And
> why aren't they looking into Google's similar exploitive practices?
> Why is it impossible to simply buy a cellphone that's not controlled
> by the OS provider? My TV doesn't force me to watch CBS TV. My car
> doesn't limit the supermarkets I can drive to.

Whilst reading your reply, Newyana2, I was reminded of IBM back in the
80's/90's where virtually any Interrogated Circuit producing Company was
permitted, by IBM, to produce CPU chips up through to the 486 variety
..... but then, having achieved CPU Supremacy, IBM virtually shut the
gates .... unless the other Manufacturers were willing to pay!!
--
Daniel

On Fri, 22 Mar 2024 08:16:14 -0400, Newyana2 wrote:

> "Daniel65" <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote
>
> | Whilst listening to the Radio (in Australia) discussing this story
> this | afternoon, the point was made that, on Phones, Apple's iOS has
> something | like a 60% market share in the U.S. of A.
> |
>
> It may be true. But those stats are from statcounter. So
> it's really a record of what cellphone is used by people who visit
> commercial websites with statcounter tracking and don't block it.
>
> Apple devotees are less likely to care about privacy, more
> likely to be wealthy. That may account for part of the stats.
> (I've been blocking statcounter in my HOSTS file for as long as I can
> remember. Do extensions like ublock origin block it?
> I don't know.)
>
> Apple's own disciple-run website says the US share is in the
> 30s and generally going down:
> https://9to5mac.com/2023/10/18/apples-us-smartphone-market-share-39-
percent/
>
> Where do they get their stats? I don't know. Maybe they're
> counting sales, rather than cellphones visiting statcounter websites? I
> don't see anyplace where they even explain their numbers! Then again,
> AppleSeeds don't care. They just want to hear that their religion is
> growing.
>
> It's become common knowledge in the US that iPhone text
> messages show as blue bubbles whereas if an Android sends a text to an
> iPhone it's green. Ick! Gross ick factor!
>
> Apple blocks efforts to change the bubble color because they
> want to promote Apple as a status symbol. Similarly, they deliberately
> interfere with anything that might mean an AppleSeed being able to
> interact with non-Apple products.
>
> On dating sites, a green bubble is often enough to disqualify
> someone from consideration -- like a young man who picks up his date in
> a rusted Ford Fiesta. Who wants to date an icky Android prole?
>
> US culture tends to be very status-conscious. People spend
> big money for iPhones, BMWs, etc. The more alienated people become, the
> more the person is the logos. Many people walk around festooned with
> logos, on their coats, shoes, shirts,
> handbags, glasses... Apple have always pushed a "premium brand" image.
> People don't mind paying through the nose. Just as with BMW, it's not so
> much the product per se as it is the logo that they buy.
>
> On the other hand, Apple does make solid products. Their products
> are also relatively easy to use by people with little tech aptitude.
> They're stable, dependable, beautifully built, and soprt iconss that
> look like they were designed by a 12 year old girl who dots her i's with
> hearts. Cute as a button and fancy as a BMW.
>
> And as the US lawsuit indicates, Apple are vicious in their
> competitive,
> monopolistic practices and their exploitation of both customers and the
> virtual slave labor force that produces their products. So their
> tech-illiterate customers are reasonable in thinking that nothing but
> Mac works well. Because if it's not Mac then it doesn't work well on a
> Mac.
>
> Flaky GenZ moralists won't buy a brand if the CEO has said something
> critical of "trans" people, but they'll happily share the CEO "cancel
> gossip"
> on their slave-built iPhone. That's a big part of the Apple mystery.
> How do they manage to maintain an image as a cute company,
> year after year, while arguably being one of the nastiest companies to
> ever exist?
>
> The other mystery is why it's taken over two decades for law
> enforcement to look into Apple's practices. There's no secret there. Yet
> suddenly everyone's worked up. Perhaps it's because no one cared about
> consumer protection, but they do care if Epic Games, PayPal and various
> other corporate entities that are suffering lost profits? And why aren't
> they looking into Google's similar exploitive practices? Why is it
> impossible to simply buy a cellphone that's not controlled by the OS
> provider? My TV doesn't force me to watch CBS TV. My car doesn't limit
> the supermarkets I can drive to.

Here it is

Stupid people do tend to spend a lots of money for a crap that
covers/hides theirs poverty and real social status.

--
Painters, electricians, comedians, journalists, rule the world.

"Daniel65" <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote

| > It's become common knowledge in the US that iPhone text messages show
| > as blue bubbles whereas if an Android sends a text to an iPhone it's
| > green. Ick! Gross ick factor!
| | Could this, possibly lead to messages from Android Phones (no Blue tick)
| being delayed in their 'reception' (i.e. time to being displayed) in iOS
| type phones??
|

I don't know about lag time. From what I've read it's just the
green color issue. Someone made an app to make the messages
show blue on iPhones, but Apple made sure to break it.

Newyana2 <Newyana2@invalid.nospam> wrote:
[...]

> Why is it impossible to simply buy a
> cellphone that's not controlled by the OS provider? My TV doesn't
> force me to watch CBS TV. My car doesn't limit the supermarkets
> I can drive to.

As said - also to you - before, it's perfectly possible to buy a
'cellphone' (read: mobile phone) where you - not the phone/'OS' supplier
- are in charge, but a *smart*phone indeed not so much.

Daniel65 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
> Cross-posted to a Linux and a Win7 Newsgroup ... I don't have an iOS
> newsgroup.

There probably isn't an iOS group, but there are iPhone and iPad
groups:

misc.phone.mobile.iphone
comp.mobile.ipad

BUT, tread very carefully when (cross)posting to those groups! :-)

[...]

On 22 Mar 2024 15:48:41 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:

> Newyana2 <Newyana2@invalid.nospam> wrote:
> [...]
>
>> Why is it impossible to simply buy a
>> cellphone that's not controlled by the OS provider? My TV doesn't force
>> me to watch CBS TV. My car doesn't limit the supermarkets I can drive
>> to.
>
> As said - also to you - before, it's perfectly possible to buy a
> 'cellphone' (read: mobile phone) where you - not the phone/'OS' supplier
> - are in charge, but a *smart*phone indeed not so much.

get a linux cellphone and you have more then smart

--
Painters, electricians, comedians, journalists, rule the world.

On 3/22/24 05:33, Daniel65 wrote:
> Cross-posted to a Linux and a Win7 Newsgroup ... I don't have an iOS
> newsgroup.
>
> "US launches landmark lawsuit against Apple"
>
> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-03-22/us-launches-landmark-lawsuit-against-apple/103620506
>
> Whilst listening to the Radio (in Australia) discussing this story this
> afternoon, the point was made that, on Phones, Apple's iOS has something
> like a 60% market share in the U.S. of A.
>
> However, on a Worldwide basis .....
>
> https://www.statista.com/statistics/272698/global-market-share-held-by-mobile-operating-systems-since-2009/
>
> Quote "Android maintained its position as the leading mobile operating
> system worldwide in the fourth quarter of 2023 with a market share of
> 70.1 percent. Android's closest rival, Apple's iOS, had a market share
> of 29.2 percent during the same period." End Quote
>
> Why is there such a drastic difference between 'With-in U.S. of A.'
> stats and 'Worldwide' stats?? i.e. almost an inversion!

My wife went to iPhone from Android because one of my sons had iPhone
and she wanted to face-time with her grand-daughter. I know 3 musicians
and they ALL do all their music work on Mac because everything on it
just plain works, I do mine on Linux and its'a nightmare. My phone is
Android but I hate google so much for their insistance on merging
accounts that I will NOT open a google account and so my phone is OFF
most of the time. Probably as many reasons as there are users...

windows x-post cut

andal <andal@andal.org> wrote at 18:21 this Friday (GMT):
> On 22 Mar 2024 15:48:41 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>
>> Newyana2 <Newyana2@invalid.nospam> wrote:
>> [...]
>>
>>> Why is it impossible to simply buy a
>>> cellphone that's not controlled by the OS provider? My TV doesn't force
>>> me to watch CBS TV. My car doesn't limit the supermarkets I can drive
>>> to.
>>
>> As said - also to you - before, it's perfectly possible to buy a
>> 'cellphone' (read: mobile phone) where you - not the phone/'OS' supplier
>> - are in charge, but a *smart*phone indeed not so much.
>
> get a linux cellphone and you have more then smart
>
>
>

Does that exist?
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

On 23-03-2024 06:10, candycanearter07 wrote:
> andal <andal@andal.org> wrote at 18:21 this Friday (GMT):
>> On 22 Mar 2024 15:48:41 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>>
>>> Newyana2 <Newyana2@invalid.nospam> wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>> Why is it impossible to simply buy a
>>>> cellphone that's not controlled by the OS provider? My TV doesn't force
>>>> me to watch CBS TV. My car doesn't limit the supermarkets I can drive
>>>> to.
>>>
>>> As said - also to you - before, it's perfectly possible to buy a
>>> 'cellphone' (read: mobile phone) where you - not the phone/'OS' supplier
>>> - are in charge, but a *smart*phone indeed not so much.
>>
>> get a linux cellphone and you have more then smart
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> Does that exist?
Not a Linux phone, but a phone with several likable properties:
- No google stuff (except what you yourself later add);
- User repairable;
- At least 5 years OS updates.
Not so good:
- for the price there exist more advanced smartphones.
Indifferent:
- Not for sale in the US (as far as I know).

See:
https://murena.com/shop/smartphones/brand-new/murena-fairphone-5/

On Sat, 23 Mar 2024 01:10:05 -0400, candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> wrote:
>> get a linux cellphone and you have more then smart

> Does that exist?

https://itsfoss.com/linux-phones/

Regards, Dave Hodgins

"andal" <andal@andal.org> wrote

| >> Why is it impossible to simply buy a
| >> cellphone that's not controlled by the OS provider? My TV doesn't force
| >> me to watch CBS TV. My car doesn't limit the supermarkets I can drive
| >> to.

| get a linux cellphone and you have more then smart
|

That might work for a small population of geeks. For me, it's
just not worth the trouble to work out the details. For the
average person it's not feasible at all. Personally I'd go further and
say that the culture of geek arrogance makes things worse,
as it becomes a mark of geek status to do things like run a
jailbroken cellphone. The issue is much bigger: Jailed cellphones
need to be illegal. Anyone should be able to buy a clean cellphone
and sign up with any service provider, with clearly delineated
fees.

(At one point some years ago I went to 4 different stores:
ATT, Verizon, T-Mobile, and one other that used to exist. Each
one told me service started at $40. Not one of them would tell
me the reall price. Though one woman who was there to pay
her bill was nice enought to show me: she was paying about $80.)

Slashdot ran an interesting piece today, linking to the DOJ
lawsuit against Apple: https://www.justice.gov/opa/media/1344546/dl?inline
The suit explains that sleazy licensing deals, limitations set
by phone services, and Apple's deliberate blocking of interactibility,
have left only Apple, Samsung and Google as serious cellphone
makers. Microsoft, Amazon, HTC and others had to drop out
because they couldn't get market share. It's like the old days
before the Bell breakup, when people had no choice but to rent
landline phones and pay steep rates for service. Except that the
current scenario is more complicated and more difficult to
understand. So not only would it be nearly impossible for a Mac
user to use a Linux cellphone. It would likely be unrealistic for
them to even use an Android cellphone. And for a current iPhone
user to switch would be even harder.

I actually have an LTC Tracfone that cost $40. I don't know
how they can afford to sell the screen for $40. Yet it's a very
slick, handheld computer that works for web browsing. I imagine
the camera doesn't match an iPhone or Samsung camera. I haven't
used it, so I don't know. But my Tracfone is still heavily infested
with Googlism. I've managed to block or remove most of it, though
every time I turn it on I get a flurry of messages telling me that
I simply must enable Google Play Store, or Google Services, or some
such. All of that should be prosecuted for monopoly control. Google
have no business running their spyware/crapware on my private
cellphone.

Newyana2 <Newyana2@invalid.nospam> wrote:
> "andal" <andal@andal.org> wrote
>
> | >> Why is it impossible to simply buy a
> | >> cellphone that's not controlled by the OS provider? My TV doesn't force
> | >> me to watch CBS TV. My car doesn't limit the supermarkets I can drive
> | >> to.
>
> | get a linux cellphone and you have more then smart
>
> That might work for a small population of geeks. For me, it's
> just not worth the trouble to work out the details. For the
> average person it's not feasible at all. Personally I'd go further and
> say that the culture of geek arrogance makes things worse,
> as it becomes a mark of geek status to do things like run a
> jailbroken cellphone. The issue is much bigger: Jailed cellphones
> need to be illegal. Anyone should be able to buy a clean cellphone
> and sign up with any service provider, with clearly delineated
> fees.

It's not a 'jailed' mobile phone, but a (network) *locked* mobile
phone. That seems to be a US-ism, because most countries just have
unlocked phones which can use any SIM for any provider.

[...]

> Slashdot ran an interesting piece today, linking to the DOJ
> lawsuit against Apple: https://www.justice.gov/opa/media/1344546/dl?inline
> The suit explains that sleazy licensing deals, limitations set
> by phone services, and Apple's deliberate blocking of interactibility,
> have left only Apple, Samsung and Google as serious cellphone
> makers. Microsoft, Amazon, HTC and others had to drop out
> because they couldn't get market share.

Probably another US-ism. In other countries, there are many, many
other brands. In our country - The Netherlands - Google phones weren't
even sold until not too long ago.

[...]

> I actually have an LTC Tracfone that cost $40. I don't know
> how they can afford to sell the screen for $40. Yet it's a very
> slick, handheld computer that works for web browsing. I imagine
> the camera doesn't match an iPhone or Samsung camera. I haven't
> used it, so I don't know. But my Tracfone is still heavily infested
> with Googlism. I've managed to block or remove most of it, though
> every time I turn it on I get a flurry of messages telling me that
> I simply must enable Google Play Store, or Google Services, or some
> such. All of that should be prosecuted for monopoly control. Google
> have no business running their spyware/crapware on my private
> cellphone.

You can keep on killfiling me - at least that's what I assume you do -
and ignoring/snipping my text when it's quoted by others - in this case
"andal" - to whom you respond, but just face it, you've bought the wrong
type of phone - for you - and now you keep on whingeing about everything
that's 'wrong' with it.

You *should* have bought a 'dumb'/feature'/'flip'/<whatever> phone,
but you *did* buy a smartphone.

In message <utml65$3lj4f$1@dont-email.me> at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 09:24:12,
Newyana2 <Newyana2@invalid.nospam> writes
>"andal" <andal@andal.org> wrote
>
>| >> Why is it impossible to simply buy a
>| >> cellphone that's not controlled by the OS provider? My TV doesn't force
>| >> me to watch CBS TV. My car doesn't limit the supermarkets I can drive
>| >> to.
>
>| get a linux cellphone and you have more then smart
>|
>
> That might work for a small population of geeks. For me, it's
>just not worth the trouble to work out the details. For the
>average person it's not feasible at all. Personally I'd go further and
>say that the culture of geek arrogance makes things worse,
>as it becomes a mark of geek status to do things like run a
>jailbroken cellphone. The issue is much bigger: Jailed cellphones

I agree about the Geek atmosphere - _sometimes_ it's unconscious.

>need to be illegal. Anyone should be able to buy a clean cellphone
>and sign up with any service provider, with clearly delineated
>fees.

Ah. Well, you're conflicting two things there - the OS, and the service
provider.

In UK, we have four network providers (may soon be three) - Vodafone,
EE, and I forget the others - and about a dozen service providers (such
as GiffGaff, and some of the supermarkets such as ASDA and Tesco): apart
from the big four, the others sell access to one of the networks, though
don't make that all that obvious. All have a confusing multitude of
plans, though most are monthly, giving a certain number of minutes,
texts, and gigabytes - these days one or two of those three are often
"unlimited" on some plans. (Very few offer true pay-as-you-go.)

Most of the 'phone shops - and sales in supermarkets - _will_ try to
sell you a 'phone that is locked to one of the providers, but will sell
you an "unlocked" one if you push them. With or without a service option
(often called a "SIM-only" contract). Most towns will have one or two
small shops which will "unlock" many locked 'phones for a fee.

As for the OS, I don't know what the percentages are, but I _think_
they're about fifty-fifty iPhone and Android - possibly somewhat more
Android, as those are considerably cheaper. But buying an Android one
_doesn't_ force you to use Google as the service provider (I don't think
they actually _offer_ service provision here).

Online: I just put "DooGee" into ebay, as that was the make my last
smartphone was: the first (I have sorted by price+P&P, so cheapest) that
came up was "DOOGEE X97 Android 12 Smartphone 16GB 4G Unlocked Mobile
Phone 4200mAh" for 30 pounds with free postage; I'm sufficiently out of
touch with smartphones that I don't know if that's good or bad, but it
doesn't sound bad. (https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/364799065569 if you're
interested, but that's probably not appropriate for US.) [It says "Helio
A22 / Quad Core / 2.0GHz / 12nm, 6.0" HD+ Display, AI Double camera
(8MP+2MP), 4200mAh Large battery, 5MP Front Camera, 3GB RAM+16GB ROM,
Android 12.0".] It says "Support nano SIM+nano SIM+TF card", which
_sounds_ like it has two SIM slots (mine had two, though they were for
different sized SIMs).

The main difference between the cheaper makes like DooGee and the more
expensive ones like Samsung is support from the manufacturer: you're
unlikely to get any updates (so for example if you bought the above one,
you'd remain on Android 12.0).
>
> (At one point some years ago I went to 4 different stores:
>ATT, Verizon, T-Mobile, and one other that used to exist. Each
>one told me service started at $40. Not one of them would tell
>me the reall price. Though one woman who was there to pay
>her bill was nice enought to show me: she was paying about $80.)
>
Terrible. I think our (or it might have been EC) legislators clamped
down on them a few years ago, but I suspect it's still easy to be misled
as to what component of the monthly fee is service provision and what
component is hire purchase of the actual 'phone, unless you insist on
buying outright an unlocked 'phone. The stores have incentive to sell
you a 'phone on some sort of credit arrangement, as they get a kickback
from the credit provider (not necessarily either the 'phone manufacturer
or the service provider - may be a third company); as with anything,
_not_ buying on credit is cheaper, if you can afford the initial outlay.
Some "bundles" claim to offer update to the latest model at frequent
intervals, but I'm not sure if under those agreements you ever actually
own the 'phone - fine until it's stolen and you have to pay for it.
>
> Slashdot ran an interesting piece today, linking to the DOJ
>lawsuit against Apple: https://www.justice.gov/opa/media/1344546/dl?inline
>The suit explains that sleazy licensing deals, limitations set
>by phone services, and Apple's deliberate blocking of interactibility,
>have left only Apple, Samsung and Google as serious cellphone
>makers. Microsoft, Amazon, HTC and others had to drop out
>because they couldn't get market share. It's like the old days
>before the Bell breakup, when people had no choice but to rent
>landline phones and pay steep rates for service. Except that the
>current scenario is more complicated and more difficult to
>understand. So not only would it be nearly impossible for a Mac
>user to use a Linux cellphone. It would likely be unrealistic for
>them to even use an Android cellphone. And for a current iPhone
>user to switch would be even harder.
>
> I actually have an LTC Tracfone that cost $40. I don't know
>how they can afford to sell the screen for $40. Yet it's a very

I don't know LTC - is that a service provider? If it is, and it's a
'phone that's locked to them, it may have been sold at a (slight) loss,
them expecting to recoup the loss from your service charges.

>slick, handheld computer that works for web browsing. I imagine
>the camera doesn't match an iPhone or Samsung camera. I haven't

The camera in my last DooGee - though far more pixels - produced
noticeably inferior results to my (old Fuji) standalone camera. (I
notice the above one says it has a Samsung camera.)

>used it, so I don't know. But my Tracfone is still heavily infested
>with Googlism. I've managed to block or remove most of it, though
>every time I turn it on I get a flurry of messages telling me that
>I simply must enable Google Play Store, or Google Services, or some
>such. All of that should be prosecuted for monopoly control. Google
>have no business running their spyware/crapware on my private
>cellphone.
>
I agree. Though how much of that is from Google and how much from your
service provider, I'm not sure. Can you turn it on as just a computer -
i. e. not connected to either the mobile (cellular) network or wifi?
>
But certainly, what is 'phone manufacturer, what is OS manufacturer, and
what is service provider, should all be made - and _enforced_ by
legislation/regulation - much clearer.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

If a cluttered desk is characteristic of a cluttered mind, what does an empty
desk mean ?

On Sat, 23 Mar 2024 09:24:12 -0400, Newyana2 wrote:

> All of that should be prosecuted
> for monopoly control. Google have no business running their
> spyware/crapware on my private cellphone.

so again, get a linux cellphone and you have more then smart and no
spyware and other crap, controll yourself or be controlled

--
Painters, electricians, comedians, journalists, rule the world.

On Sat, 23 Mar 2024 05:10:05 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:

> andal <andal@andal.org> wrote at 18:21 this Friday (GMT):
>> On 22 Mar 2024 15:48:41 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>>
>>> Newyana2 <Newyana2@invalid.nospam> wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>> Why is it impossible to simply buy a
>>>> cellphone that's not controlled by the OS provider? My TV doesn't
>>>> force me to watch CBS TV. My car doesn't limit the supermarkets I can
>>>> drive to.
>>>
>>> As said - also to you - before, it's perfectly possible to buy a
>>> 'cellphone' (read: mobile phone) where you - not the phone/'OS'
>>> supplier - are in charge, but a *smart*phone indeed not so much.
>>
>> get a linux cellphone and you have more then smart
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> Does that exist?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_open-source_mobile_phones

--
Painters, electricians, comedians, journalists, rule the world.

On Sat, 23 Mar 2024 01:57:20 -0400, David W. Hodgins wrote:

> On Sat, 23 Mar 2024 01:10:05 -0400, candycanearter07
> <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> wrote:
>>> get a linux cellphone and you have more then smart
>
>> Does that exist?
>
> https://itsfoss.com/linux-phones/
>
> Regards, Dave Hodgins

some people need just a toy that can be used as a phone

then complain when one of the "wheel" falls off :)

--
Painters, electricians, comedians, journalists, rule the world.

"J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote

| Ah. Well, you're conflicting two things there - the OS, and the service
| provider.
|

I'm talking about 3 things: hardware maker, OS maker and service.
For example, Samsung, Google, and Verizon, or Apple, Apple and Verizon.
Google doesn't provide phone service but they do greatly control
and spy on Android cellphones. Apple does the same with iPhones.
What I'm saying is that Apple and Google should have no access to
the phones except for voluntary OS updates, or perhaps for
voluntarily loaded apps. If they want to have a "store" then let
them, but it shouldn't be forced and other stores shouldn't be
restricted. That's partly what the US lawsuit is about.

Microsoft is also gradually getting in on this model, by having
their "Windows Store" where they sell UWP/Metro crap and try to
coerce Windows users to take part. For example, they're currently
discontinuing Outlook and pushing Metro Outllook through their store.
Which is odd, given that they recently announced that they'd be
coming out with non-rental MS Office again. (Though I'm not certain
that the new Office won't just be Metro crap.)

| > I actually have an LTC Tracfone that cost $40. I don't know
| >how they can afford to sell the screen for $40. Yet it's a very
| | I don't know LTC - is that a service provider? If it is, and it's a
| 'phone that's locked to them, it may have been sold at a (slight) loss,
| them expecting to recoup the loss from your service charges.
|

LTC is the hardware maker. Tracfone is the service provider,
which was bought by Verizon. We have a few smaller operations
like that, catering to people like me who only want minimal service.
I buy 60 minutes every 90 days, and probably use 5 of those minutes.

| >used it, so I don't know. But my Tracfone is still heavily infested
| >with Googlism. I've managed to block or remove most of it, though
| >every time I turn it on I get a flurry of messages telling me that
| >I simply must enable Google Play Store, or Google Services, or some
| >such. All of that should be prosecuted for monopoly control. Google
| >have no business running their spyware/crapware on my private
| >cellphone.
| >
| I agree. Though how much of that is from Google and how much from your
| service provider, I'm not sure. Can you turn it on as just a computer -
| i. e. not connected to either the mobile (cellular) network or wifi?

None of it is from the Tracfone service. It's all Google crap
pre-installed on Android. I go to a non-Google app provider, have
no Google account and use no Google apps or services, but
Google infests the whole OS. There are dozens of pre-installed
Google processes, many of which can't be uninstalled.

Tracfone just sells me minutes and provides the phone call
service.

I can use the phone as a computer, but there's nothing much
of value. I can also use it with wifi or cell minutes, with Firefox,
to go online. Occasionally that's useful.

With my last Tracfone it got too old. I decided to try to use it
as a portable PDF reader. That worked, but it was just too small
to be useful. I finally threw it out. There simply isn't much I can do
on a cellphone screen that's worth doing. They work OK for services.
But it's basically a services kiosk device.

"andal" <andal@andal.org> wrote

| > All of that should be prosecuted
| > for monopoly control. Google have no business running their
| > spyware/crapware on my private cellphone.
| | so again, get a linux cellphone and you have more then smart and no
| spyware and other crap, controll yourself or be controlled
| Yes, I can buy a cellphone that can't run Android
apps. I could then install an Android environment on
that phone and get certified by Google to install
Android apps. Maybe I can even get a phone service
provider to give me a plan... Great.

You're talking nonsense. It's not a viable solution,
and even if it were, 99% of people couldn't manage
it. This is like the people who rave about Linux desktop.
You need to be a geek to install it and once installed,
the software is lacking. Sure, you're free of Microsoft.
But it's an idiotic answer to a problem that needs to be
solved at a much higher level, by passing laws that
kick tech companies off of private devices.

This is what I as describing above. For geeks to
answer these problems with, "Then be a geek" is less
than helpful. It's obfuscating and disingenuous.

Newyana2 <Newyana2@invalid.nospam> wrote:
> "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote
>
> | Ah. Well, you're conflicting two things there - the OS, and the service
> | provider.
>
> I'm talking about 3 things: hardware maker, OS maker and service.
> For example, Samsung, Google, and Verizon, or Apple, Apple and Verizon.
> Google doesn't provide phone service but they do greatly control
> and spy on Android cellphones. Apple does the same with iPhones.
> What I'm saying is that Apple and Google should have no access to
> the phones except for voluntary OS updates, or perhaps for
> voluntarily loaded apps. If they want to have a "store" then let
> them, but it shouldn't be forced and other stores shouldn't be
> restricted. That's partly what the US lawsuit is about.

Yes, but the lawsuit is about Apple. For Google, you've always been
able to use other app stores (later in your post, you say so yurself).

As to updates, you get system/OS/app updates from the phone
manufacturer (Samsung in your example), some system/OS updates from
Google ("Google Play system updates" (note "system updates", they are
system updates, not updates to the Google Play System (note lower case
versus upper case first letter of "system'))) and app updates from
wherever you got the apps.

[...]

> None of it is from the Tracfone service. It's all Google crap
> pre-installed on Android. I go to a non-Google app provider, have
> no Google account and use no Google apps or services, but
> Google infests the whole OS. There are dozens of pre-installed
> Google processes, many of which can't be uninstalled.

That's not too dissimilar from Microsoft Windows on your PC. Windows
also contains all kinds of processes, services, etc. which you 'need'
and can't uninstall. You may be able to prevent some processes and
services from starting, but that's about all.

Android isn't all that different, but the point is you're used to and
familiar with the inner workings of Windows, but you know very little
about Android and are only/mostly whingeing, instead of willing to
learn. As I said in another response: You bought the wrong type of
phone, for you.

[...]

David W. Hodgins <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> wrote at 05:57 this Saturday (GMT):
> On Sat, 23 Mar 2024 01:10:05 -0400, candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> wrote:
>>> get a linux cellphone and you have more then smart
>
>> Does that exist?
>
> https://itsfoss.com/linux-phones/
>
> Regards, Dave Hodgins

Awesome, I might look at getting one.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

candycanearter07 wrote:

>> https://itsfoss.com/linux-phones/

>Awesome, I might look at getting one.

Read the comments under the article, mostly negative, for a reason.

-jw-

--

And now for something completely different...