On Sat, 4 Nov 2023 09:23:07 -0400, Alan Browne wrote:

> Whoosh - for comparable spec, the prices are similar between iPhone and
> Android. The main difference is that Apple offer little at the bottom
> spec end.

What an idiot. No iPhone comes even close to what Android phones do.
That means there is no comparison that is possible for him to make.

Unless he completely ignores that Android phones do more than iPhones can.
If that's what he's doing, then he's an idiot. Pure and simple. An idiot.

Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote

> But yes, there is a strong secondary market for iPhones, probably
> mainly due to the long support cycle.

Long support cycle? Are you kidding? Or just ignorant, Frank?

FACT:
The iPhone full-hotfix support cycle is only a _single_ release, Frank.
*That's the _shortest_ support cycle in the entire industry.*

If an iPhone can't run iOS 17, it's not fully supported, Frank.
Meanwhile, neither Andy nor I can find an EOL date for most of Android.

On 2023-11-04 21:41:37 +0000, The Real Bev said:

> On 11/4/23 2:11 PM, Your Name wrote:
>> On 2023-11-04 12:19:51 +0000, Andy Burns said:
>>> Alan Browne quoted:
>>>>
>>>> "The iPhone is obviously superior at one thing. Ask your wallet."
>>>> https://wapo.st/45Ya1CH
>>>
>>> Re-sale value is unimportant to me.
>>>
>>> Of all my android phones, I keep the most recent as a viable spare,
>>> have given three to family members, one was destroyed by washing
>>> machine and I keep the oldest one for nostalgia reasons.
>>
>> If you keep them sealed in the box, then you might get a lot more
>> "resale value" for them. :-)
>
> Not necessarily. I have two genuine Xerox acoustic modems unused in
> their original boxes which I doubt have any value at all.

There are a few acoustic couplers / modems on eBay with prices starting
at around US$60 - one Panasonic one with the box is priced at almost
US$500. Whether they actually sell or not is a different question
though. :-)

>> An Original, Factory-Sealed, 4GB iPhone
>> Just Sold at Auction for Over US$190,000
>>
>> <https://gizmodo.com/original-sealed-iphone-sells-auction-190-000-dollars-1850647037>
>>

On 5/11/2023, Andy Burns wrote:

>> "WaPo" has been shorthand for The Washington Post since ... well a long
>> freaking time.
>
> But that's only clear *after* you've gone there, before that who knows
> where it'll lead?

The Washington Post didn't factor in that an iPhone costs two to three
times as much over its lifetime to operate than an Android phone does.

Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote

> Even if the makers still support the OS (which despite claims is not
> true for old versions of Android either), the phone companies don't
> keep supporting them forever - 3G networks are being turned off, 4G and
> 5G networks will also eventually be turned off as newer systems come
> along. Your device may well still work, but it will be useless as a
> phone / text-messenger.

The fact is the iPhone has the _shortest_ support cycle in the industry.
And the iPhone has ten times as many _exploited_ zero-day holes too.

It's always the case that the ignorant iKooks are completely clueless that
multiple versions of Android are fully supported while only a single
version of iOS is ever fully supported. Right now that's _only_ iOS 17.

No other version of iOS is fully supported at any time but the latest.
That's it.

One release.
That's partly _why_ the iPhone is exploited ten times more than is Android.

In addition, the ignorant iKooks are blissfully unaware most of Android is
modular, and hence it's supported forever, in that nobody can find the EOL
date for mainstream modules (which comprise more than half of Android).

badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote

> Do you actually resale your phone or does it go in the drawer as a spare?
> I�m leery of buying used phones unless they�re coming from someone I know.
> And the times I do buy a phone it�s because the one I have is broken or too
> old. They end up in the drawer or given to recycle programs. I guess some
> people buy a new phone every year just to boast about it.

You can chastise me if I ever say something unreasonable or illogical.

My Samsung Galaxy A32-5G was free from T-Mobile (as you're well aware),
so all I paid was the 10% sales tax on the MSPR and it came with a charger.

That free phone is far more powerful than any iPhone ever sold, in terms of
what it can do (which I hope people understand by now), so it's already
better than any iPhone ever sold - and it was essentially free + tax.

Alan Browne claims he can find a "comparable" iPhone but he can't.
He lied.

As just one example, my free phone does GPS spoofing.
Can any iPhone do that?

My free phone can graphically debug Wi-Fi APs. Can any iPhone do that?
My free phone can run the Tor browser. Can any iPhone do that?
My free phone can run a system firewall. Can any iPhone do that?
My free phone can swap out the launcher. Can any iPhone do that?
My free phone can change the default text messenger.
My free phone can do automatic call recording.
My free phone can torrent.
My free phone can ...

The point is that Alan Browne pretends that his iPhone can do that.
But it can't.

There is no "comparable" iPhone to even my free Android phone.
What Alan Browne is doing is ignoring that an iPhone is just a toy.

A very expensive toy.
But a toy nonetheless.

There is no comparison between what an iPhone & Android phone does.

Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote

> "The iPhone is obviously superior at one thing. Ask your wallet."
> -WaPo
> https://wapo.st/45Ya1CH

You can chastise me if I ever say something unreasonable or illogical.

My Samsung Galaxy A32-5G was free from T-Mobile (as you're well aware),
so all I paid was the 10% sales tax on the MSPR and it came with a charger.

That free phone is far more powerful than any iPhone ever sold, in terms of
what it can do (which I hope people understand by now), so it's already
better than any iPhone ever sold - and it was essentially free + tax.

Alan Browne claims he can find a "comparable" iPhone but he can't.
He lied.

As just one example, my free phone does GPS spoofing.
Can any iPhone do that?

My free phone can graphically debug Wi-Fi APs. Can any iPhone do that?
My free phone can run the Tor browser. Can any iPhone do that?
My free phone can run a system firewall. Can any iPhone do that?
My free phone can swap out the launcher. Can any iPhone do that?
My free phone can change the default text messenger.
My free phone can do automatic call recording.
My free phone can torrent.
My free phone can ...

The point is that Alan Browne pretends that his iPhone can do that.
But it can't.

There is no "comparable" iPhone to even my free Android phone.
What Alan Browne is doing is ignoring that an iPhone is just a toy.

A very expensive toy.
But a toy nonetheless.

There is no comparison between what an iPhone & Android phone does.

On 2023-11-04 23:52, The Real Bev wrote:
> On 11/4/23 3:00 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>> On 2023-11-04 21:38, Alan Browne wrote:
>>> On 2023-11-04 16:22, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>> On 2023-11-04 21:02, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>>>>> [Judst clarifying some loose ends.]
>>>>>
>>>>> Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>>>> Muddying the waters (badly). The point of the article was how much
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> seller could get for a phone v. what he paid for it.
>>>>>
>>>>>    Fair enough. I went by the Subject of your post. I don't follow
>>>>> shady
>>>>> looking URLs. If you'd said it was a pointer to a The Washington Post
>>>>> article, I would have gone there.
>>>>
>>>> Same here.
>>>>
>>>
>>> "WaPo" has been shorthand for The Washington Post since ... well a
>>> long freaking time.
>>
>> And I should know that because... ?
>
> :-)
>
> It's a well-known abbreviation all over the world.  I thought that ALL
> literate people knew that.  <sigh>  They did bring down (Woodward &
> Bernstein), with Judge Sirica's help, of course, our President Nixon.
>
> A cool thing -- we actually met Sirica in his office a few days after
> Nixon resigned.  Nice guy.
>
>
Who is that Nixon guy?
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

On 11/4/23 6:50 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> On 2023-11-04 23:52, The Real Bev wrote:
>> On 11/4/23 3:00 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>> On 2023-11-04 21:38, Alan Browne wrote:
>>>> On 2023-11-04 16:22, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>>> On 2023-11-04 21:02, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>>>>>> [Judst clarifying some loose ends.]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Muddying the waters (badly). The point of the article was how much
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> seller could get for a phone v. what he paid for it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>    Fair enough. I went by the Subject of your post. I don't follow
>>>>>> shady
>>>>>> looking URLs. If you'd said it was a pointer to a The Washington Post
>>>>>> article, I would have gone there.
>>>>>
>>>>> Same here.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "WaPo" has been shorthand for The Washington Post since ... well a
>>>> long freaking time.
>>>
>>> And I should know that because... ?
>>
>> :-)
>>
>> It's a well-known abbreviation all over the world.  I thought that ALL
>> literate people knew that.  <sigh>  They did bring down (Woodward &
>> Bernstein), with Judge Sirica's help, of course, our President Nixon.
>>
>> A cool thing -- we actually met Sirica in his office a few days after
>> Nixon resigned.  Nice guy.

He, at that time the most powerful man in the world, was nice enough to
chat for 15 minutes or so with a random California family who just
wanted to watch him hold court. When some celebrity puts on airs, think
about that.

We also saw the file cabinet where The Tapes were stored.

> Who is that Nixon guy?

President
Plumbers
I am not a crook
Apple Brown Ratty
Deep Throat

Looking back, his 'crimes' weren't all that bad. He didn't actually do
anything, he just covered up a break-in to the Dem Party HQ by some
White House employees, probably after the fact. If he'd been a Democrat
he would have been sent to bed without supper.

--
Cheers, Bev
If you have one lawyer in town, he goes hungry.
If you have two lawyers in town, they both get rich.

Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
> Alan Browne wrote:
>
> > "WaPo" has been shorthand for The Washington Post since ... well a long
> > freaking time.
>
> But that's only clear *after* you've gone there, before that who knows
> where it'll lead?

Indeed, just saying "The Washington Post" would have been enough. (And
explaining why the short URL was needed (i.e. to show an article behind a
paywall).)

Funny thing, when I - after the fact - invoked the URL, it failed two
or three times, one time wth a DNS lookup failure.

I guess that - at least on this side of the pond - not too many people
reference websites with the TLD of a small African island nation! :-)

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.st>

Your Name <YourName@yourisp.com> wrote:
[...]

> Even if the makers still support the OS (which despite claims is not
> true for old versions of Android either), the phone companies don't
> keep supporting them forever - 3G networks are being turned off, 4G and
> 5G networks will also eventually be turned off as newer systems come
> along. Your device may well still work, but it will be useless as a
> phone / text-messenger.

Nah, no problem! We'll just hop from one Maccas to the next Starbucks
and use WhatsApp and live happily ever after.

Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
> Alan Browne wrote:
>
> > "WaPo" has been shorthand for The Washington Post since ... well a long
> > freaking time.
>
> But that's only clear *after* you've gone there, before that who knows
> where it'll lead?

Indeed, just saying "The Washington Post" would have been enough. (And
explaining why the short URL was needed (i.e. to show an article behind a
paywall).)

Funny thing, when I - after the fact - invoked the URL, it failed two
or three times, one time wth a DNS lookup failure.

I guess that - at least on this side of the pond - not too many people
reference websites with the TLD of a small African island nation! :-)

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.st>

On 2023-11-04 21:06, Frankie wrote:
> On 5/11/2023, Andy Burns wrote:
>
>>> "WaPo" has been shorthand for The Washington Post since ... well a long
>>> freaking time.
>>
>> But that's only clear *after* you've gone there, before that who knows
>> where it'll lead?
>
> The Washington Post didn't factor in that an iPhone costs two to three
> times as much over its lifetime to operate than an Android phone does.

How so? If I operated an Android the way I operate my iPhone the costs
would be the same (other than minor variance due to power consumption in
one over the other).

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

On 2023-11-04 23:03, The Real Bev wrote:
> On 11/4/23 6:50 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:

>> Who is that Nixon guy?
>
> President
> Plumbers
> I am not a crook
> Apple Brown Ratty

> Deep Throat

Eh? Deep Throat = Mark Felt.

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

On 2023-11-05 05:37, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>> Alan Browne wrote:
>>
>>> "WaPo" has been shorthand for The Washington Post since ... well a long
>>> freaking time.
>>
>> But that's only clear *after* you've gone there, before that who knows
>> where it'll lead?
>
> Indeed, just saying "The Washington Post" would have been enough. (And
> explaining why the short URL was needed (i.e. to show an article behind a
> paywall).)

It (https://wapo.st/45Ya1CH ) is a gift link - will open anywhere.

Just tested on various browsers and different machines where I'm not
logged into my WaPo account.

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

On 2023-11-05 05:44, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>> Alan Browne wrote:
>>
>>> "WaPo" has been shorthand for The Washington Post since ... well a long
>>> freaking time.
>>
>> But that's only clear *after* you've gone there, before that who knows
>> where it'll lead?
>
> Indeed, just saying "The Washington Post" would have been enough. (And
> explaining why the short URL was needed (i.e. to show an article behind a
> paywall).)

Correct. Next time I'll spell it out in full.

Incorrect: the article was a free "gift" - no paywall via that link.

>
> Funny thing, when I - after the fact - invoked the URL, it failed two
> or three times, one time wth a DNS lookup failure.

No issue here. Various browsers - not logged in to WaPo, from various
VPN sites (Paris, Tokyo, Santiago)

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

Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
> On 2023-11-05 05:44, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> > Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
> >> Alan Browne wrote:
> >>
> >>> "WaPo" has been shorthand for The Washington Post since ... well a long
> >>> freaking time.
> >>
> >> But that's only clear *after* you've gone there, before that who knows
> >> where it'll lead?
> >
> > Indeed, just saying "The Washington Post" would have been enough. (And
> > explaining why the short URL was needed (i.e. to show an article behind a
> > paywall).)
>
> Correct. Next time I'll spell it out in full.

Thanks.

> Incorrect: the article was a free "gift" - no paywall via that link.

Yes, that's what I meant, hence "why ... needed" and "to show ...".
It would have been better/clearer if I had said "to show an article
_which is_ behind a paywall.

> > Funny thing, when I - after the fact - invoked the URL, it failed two
> > or three times, one time wth a DNS lookup failure.
>
> No issue here. Various browsers - not logged in to WaPo, from various
> VPN sites (Paris, Tokyo, Santiago)

Yes, as I mentioned, it was probably just a DNS lookup failure. Now it
- of course - works fine, because it's in all kinds of caches.

Alan Browne, 2023-11-04 13:11:

> "The iPhone is obviously superior at one thing. Ask your wallet."
> -WaPo
> https://wapo.st/45Ya1CH

This may change when Android devices also get updates for 7 years.

Because the value of older devices is also limited by the fact that many
Android devices don't get any support after a couple of years while a 4
year old iPhone can still be used for a number of years.

--
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de

On 5/11/2023, Alan Browne wrote:

>>>> "WaPo" has been shorthand for The Washington Post since ... well a long
>>>> freaking time.
>>>
>>> But that's only clear *after* you've gone there, before that who knows
>>> where it'll lead?
>>
>> The Washington Post didn't factor in that an iPhone costs two to three
>> times as much over its lifetime to operate than an Android phone does.
>
> How so? If I operated an Android the way I operate my iPhone the costs
> would be the same (other than minor variance due to power consumption in
> one over the other).

The Post only looked at a single cherry picked datapoint which is at the
final point of resale/tradein but they ignored Apple's 3X lifetime costs.

It's well known Apple apps costs more than Android apps and that Apple
accessories are less often provided than Android accessories in the box.

It's well known Apple designed proprietary cabling (until forced to be
compatible) and Apple removed ports & slots so you have to buy more stuff.

It's also well known Apple accessories cost more than Android accessories,
and that most Apple owners pay forever for AppleCare because they're afraid
of their phones breaking (as Apple repairs are usually ten times the cost).

When you average out the huge waste of owning Apple products, it's always
two to three times the overall cost of owning similar Android devices.

On 2023-11-05 13:37, Frankie wrote:
> On 5/11/2023, Alan Browne wrote:
>
>>>>> "WaPo" has been shorthand for The Washington Post since ... well a long
>>>>> freaking time.
>>>>
>>>> But that's only clear *after* you've gone there, before that who knows
>>>> where it'll lead?
>>>
>>> The Washington Post didn't factor in that an iPhone costs two to three
>>> times as much over its lifetime to operate than an Android phone does.
>>
>> How so? If I operated an Android the way I operate my iPhone the costs
>> would be the same (other than minor variance due to power consumption in
>> one over the other).
>
> The Post only looked at a single cherry picked datapoint

Uhm - no. They didn't.

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

Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote

> This may change when Android devices also get updates for 7 years.
>
> Because the value of older devices is also limited by the fact that many
> Android devices don't get any support after a couple of years while a 4
> year old iPhone can still be used for a number of years.

Hi Arno,

Even smart people assume incredibly ignorant things, Arno.
Why?

Because even smart people can be incredibly ignorant of the facts.
<https://www.androidpolice.com/project-mainline-android-14/>
<https://artihe.com/heres-what-you-need-to-know-about-project-mainline-on-android-14-and-later/>

The facts are that most of Android is supported forever, Arno. (1)

*What's new in Google System Updates*
<https://support.google.com/product-documentation/answer/11412553>

*Google Will Publish Monthly Changelog For Google Play System Updates*
<https://www.androidheadlines.com/2022/01/google-monthly-changelog-play-system-updates.html>

*Now you can learn what's new in each Google Play system update for Android*
<https://9to5google.com/2022/01/10/whats-new-android-google-play-system-updates/>

*How to find out what's actually new in Google Play System Updates*
<https://www.esper.io/blog/building-a-google-play-system-update-changelog>

*Reboot Chronicles: An in-depth look at Android Mainline updates*
<https://www.intuneirl.com/why-your-android-device-reboots/>

Notice Apple supports only one release and every Android 10+ device
is supported forever - and yet - even smart people are unaware of that. (1)

Does anyone on this newsgroup comprehend simple basic obvious facts?
In fact, the iPhone has the _shortest_ support life in the industry, Arno.

You seem intelligent so I think you can comprehend that the iPhone is not
updated anything like every other common computing device is updated.

Up until iOS 16, iOS was shipped _only_ as a primitive monolith; and iOS
is _still_ a primitive monolith but at least it was slightly opened in iOS 16.
<https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201224>

Hence, the first thing intelligent people need to realize is iOS is a
primitive monolith - which takes a loooooooooong time to update...
which is one of the reasons iOS is exploited ten times more than Android is.

Don't believe me?
Read this.
<https://www.cisa.gov/known-exploited-vulnerabilities-catalog>

But the primitive structure of iOS updates is only one of the many
reasons that iOS has the shortest full support lifespan in the industry, Arno.

The fact is that the only people claiming a long support lifetime for Apple
devices are people who are always unaware of not only that salient fact...

But they _always ignorant of the salient facts that iOS is not updated
like any other operating system is updated, Arno.

And that's why full support for iOS is the _shortest_ in the industry.

Don't believe me?
Are you aware that Apple only fully supports a _single_ release?
I am.

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

Given every other operating system _except_ for iOS is updated in multiple
layers, are you aware that Android's mainline support is forever? (1)
--
(1) Forever here means every Android 10+ device is updated monthly over
the Internet so quietly that almost nobody but Andy Burns on this newsgroup
is aware of that salient fact - and - neither Andy nor I can find any EOL
date for these monthly updates - and - all of the updates are donated to
AOSP - so even if Google did stop updating Android phones forever - the
open source community could support Android phones for decades thereafter.

On 5/11/2023, Alan Browne wrote:

>> The Post only looked at a single cherry picked datapoint
>
> Uhm - no. They didn't.

Look again.

It's a cherry picked statistic that completely ignored lifetime costs.

Apple's lifetime costs are always double to triple that of Android.

On 2023-11-05 13:58, Frankie wrote:
> On 5/11/2023, Alan Browne wrote:
>
>>> The Post only looked at a single cherry picked datapoint
>>
>> Uhm - no. They didn't.
>
> Look again.
>
> It's a cherry picked statistic that completely ignored lifetime costs.

Not at all.

>
> Apple's lifetime costs are always double to triple that of Android.

Inane. I asked you to illustrate that in another post - you ignored it
because you can't.

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

On 6/11/2023, Alan Browne wrote:

>> It's a cherry picked statistic that completely ignored lifetime costs.
>
> Not at all.

When you average the huge waste of owning Apple products where you have to
overcome the loss of ports and missing slots and proprietary cabling and
repair costs so far off the charts everyone pays high ransoms to AppleCare,
it's always 2X to 3X the overall cost of owning similar Android devices.

Doesn't it occur to you that's why Apple profits are so very high?

Or do you think Apple's profits are off the charts because they're not
fleecing you every time you have to buy something that is free on Android?

People like you pay many times what Android costs & then brag about getting
a very tiny amount of your wasted money back in what you call resale value.

Apple makes all that money off of people like you.

On 2023-11-06 00:26, Frankie wrote:
> On 6/11/2023, Alan Browne wrote:
>
>>> It's a cherry picked statistic that completely ignored lifetime costs.
>>
>> Not at all.
>
> When you average the huge waste of owning Apple products where you have to
> overcome the loss of ports and missing slots and proprietary cabling and
> repair costs so far off the charts everyone pays high ransoms to AppleCare,
> it's always 2X to 3X the overall cost of owning similar Android devices.

You can't come up with proof of that, of course. Since my devices in
the past came with all the cables I've ever needed, there is no cost to
add more.

The only additional cable I've ever bought is for my car just because I
wanted the shortest version possible to avoid cable clutter.

That's it. No other costs at all. On my 3rd iPhone.

Ironically Europe's absurd rules will likely force me to buy 2 or 3
cables when I eventually get a new phone (to cover the office, car and
home office).

> Doesn't it occur to you that's why Apple profits are so very high?

That's not why their profits are so high.

On all of their products, they command high margins because the phones
(and other products) are popular. And they are popular because they are
very good.

And in the right use case, integrate across Apple devices so seamlessly
that one tends to not notice it going on.

> Or do you think Apple's profits are off the charts because they're not
> fleecing you every time you have to buy something that is free on Android?

I've never been forced to buy anything extra from Apple to keep my Apple
things going. Once case (above) was for "neatness".

>
> People like you pay many times what Android costs & then brag about getting
> a very tiny amount of your wasted money back in what you call resale value.
>
> Apple makes all that money off of people like you.

Good for them and good that several mutual funds of mine hold Apple stock.

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