On 18/11/2023 10:05, Theo wrote:
> alan_m <junk@admac.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 17/11/2023 14:43, Theo wrote:
>>> Jeff Gaines <jgnewsid@outlook.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Any of you come across a smartphone without a camera?
>>>
>>> Only for those who need to go into secure military facilities etc, ie you're
>>> going to pay a premium and get a worse phone for it. There are companies
>>> who will unsolder the camera from an existing phone for a hefty fee.
>>>
>>> (SOP for secure facilities is to require you to leave your phone in a locker
>>> in the guardpost, so most people don't need these)
>>
>> Possibly for high security no cameras and no audio recording devices.
>> A smartphone will fail both.
>
> Depends on the threat model. eg if you service fighter jets, they don't
> want you taking photos of sensitive documents or military hardware, but
> audio isn't really a problem - you're hardly going to dictate the schematic
> of the classified radar to an audio recording.
>
But it can be used to try and deduce what passwords you are entering
from the sounds and the time taken to move fingers from one key
press to the next on a PC keyboard.

Likewise it could be possible to install a keylogger type of
virus which then rebroadcasts what it has discovered by using the
speaker to output sounds that the human ear cannot hear but can
be picked up by another device, thereby leaving no obvious
email or phone log trace.

> But I agree a 'no personal phones' policy is a lot simpler here.
> (if you get a work phone, they probably disable the camera via MDM)
>
> Theo

On 18/11/2023 10:54, Chris Green wrote:
> David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> wrote:
>> On 18/11/2023 09:39, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>>
>> Also as I said the Camera in the phone adds so much to the utility of
>> the phone. I use my camera so often for simply noting things, like when
>> seeing something in IKEA and noting its pickup bay.
>>
>> I do own a separate camera but its bulky to carry, its really only
>> better for long telephoto shots (it has a super zoom lense) and its a
>> faff getting the pictures onto my PC. Those from the phone come via
>> OneDrive.
>>
> Panasonic TZ60 is the answer. I very rarely take my phone with me
> because it's of very little use to me. I use a laptop when I need to
> browse the internet, send messages, whatever. I use the TZ60 for
> taking pictures, proper viewfinder, long telephoto when needed, as
> handy (smaller even) than most modern smartphones.
>
"The DMC-TZ60 is a well-built camera with a high quality metal body
that's covered in a tactile rubberised coating. "

Its a 2014 model. Has the rubber coating gone sticky yet ?

Andrew <Andrew97d@btinternet.com> wrote:
> On 18/11/2023 10:54, Chris Green wrote:
> > David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> wrote:
> >> On 18/11/2023 09:39, Jeff Gaines wrote:
> >>
> >> Also as I said the Camera in the phone adds so much to the utility of
> >> the phone. I use my camera so often for simply noting things, like when
> >> seeing something in IKEA and noting its pickup bay.
> >>
> >> I do own a separate camera but its bulky to carry, its really only
> >> better for long telephoto shots (it has a super zoom lense) and its a
> >> faff getting the pictures onto my PC. Those from the phone come via
> >> OneDrive.
> >>
> > Panasonic TZ60 is the answer. I very rarely take my phone with me
> > because it's of very little use to me. I use a laptop when I need to
> > browse the internet, send messages, whatever. I use the TZ60 for
> > taking pictures, proper viewfinder, long telephoto when needed, as
> > handy (smaller even) than most modern smartphones.
> >
> "The DMC-TZ60 is a well-built camera with a high quality metal body
> that's covered in a tactile rubberised coating. "
>
> Its a 2014 model. Has the rubber coating gone sticky yet ?
>
Not that I've noticed! :-)

I think it's still being made and there's newer models in the same
family, e.g. TZ80.

--
Chris Green
·

On 18-Nov-23 9:15, David Wade wrote:
> On 18/11/2023 04:31, alan_m wrote:
>> On 17/11/2023 14:43, Theo wrote:
>>> Jeff Gaines <jgnewsid@outlook.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Any of you come across a smartphone without a camera?
>>>
>>> Only for those who need to go into secure military facilities etc, ie
>>> you're
>>> going to pay a premium and get a worse phone for it.  There are
>>> companies
>>> who will unsolder the camera from an existing phone for a hefty fee.
>>>
>>> (SOP for secure facilities is to require you to leave your phone in a
>>> locker
>>> in the guardpost, so most people don't need these)
>>
>> Possibly for high security no cameras and no audio recording devices.
>> A smartphone will fail both.
>>
> If its that secure, do they allow any phones at all. All phones can be
> used as a recording device. Simply ring your own voicemail...
>
> Also why would you need a phone in such a place? Probably also has
> faraday cages so won't work. If you need to make a call they will have a
> phone you can use.
> Any incoming to voice mail.....
>
> .... definitely sounds a niche requirement...

Several years before mobile phones (even dumb ones) became a thing, I
visited a secure site with a much more senior colleague. We needed to
see what a particular sub-assembly looked like, since we were designing
its replacement.
I was a trifle perturbed, when he pulled out one of those classic Minox
spy cameras and started taking photographs.

--
Sam Plusnet

On 19-Nov-23 12:15, Chris Green wrote:
> Andrew <Andrew97d@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> On 18/11/2023 10:54, Chris Green wrote:
>>> David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On 18/11/2023 09:39, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Also as I said the Camera in the phone adds so much to the utility of
>>>> the phone. I use my camera so often for simply noting things, like when
>>>> seeing something in IKEA and noting its pickup bay.
>>>>
>>>> I do own a separate camera but its bulky to carry, its really only
>>>> better for long telephoto shots (it has a super zoom lense) and its a
>>>> faff getting the pictures onto my PC. Those from the phone come via
>>>> OneDrive.
>>>>
>>> Panasonic TZ60 is the answer. I very rarely take my phone with me
>>> because it's of very little use to me. I use a laptop when I need to
>>> browse the internet, send messages, whatever. I use the TZ60 for
>>> taking pictures, proper viewfinder, long telephoto when needed, as
>>> handy (smaller even) than most modern smartphones.
>>>
>> "The DMC-TZ60 is a well-built camera with a high quality metal body
>> that's covered in a tactile rubberised coating. "
>>
>> Its a 2014 model. Has the rubber coating gone sticky yet ?
>>
> Not that I've noticed! :-)
>
> I think it's still being made and there's newer models in the same
> family, e.g. TZ80.
>
I have the TZ70, and the body hasn't deteriorated in any way.

That said, I can't recall ever using it since I got a phone with a
decent camera on board. I already carry a phone and a Kindle
Paperwhite[1] with me a lot of the time, so an extra gadget would be too
much.

[1] Yes, I know I could use the phone to read books, but its screen is
terrible for this purpose - when compared to the Paperwhite.

--
Sam Plusnet

In message <oJs6N.35476$Ee89.23952@fx17.iad>, Sam Plusnet <not@home.com>
writes
>On 18-Nov-23 9:15, David Wade wrote:
>> On 18/11/2023 04:31, alan_m wrote:
>>> On 17/11/2023 14:43, Theo wrote:
>>>> Jeff Gaines <jgnewsid@outlook.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Any of you come across a smartphone without a camera?
>>>>
>>>> Only for those who need to go into secure military facilities etc,
>>>>ie you're
>>>> going to pay a premium and get a worse phone for it.  There are
>>>>companies
>>>> who will unsolder the camera from an existing phone for a hefty fee.
>>>>
>>>> (SOP for secure facilities is to require you to leave your phone in
>>>>a locker
>>>> in the guardpost, so most people don't need these)
>>>
>>> Possibly for high security no cameras and no audio recording devices.
>>> A smartphone will fail both.
>>>
>> If its that secure, do they allow any phones at all. All phones can
>>be used as a recording device. Simply ring your own voicemail...
>> Also why would you need a phone in such a place? Probably also has
>>faraday cages so won't work. If you need to make a call they will have
>>a phone you can use.
>> Any incoming to voice mail.....
>> .... definitely sounds a niche requirement...
>
>Several years before mobile phones (even dumb ones) became a thing, I
>visited a secure site with a much more senior colleague. We needed to
>see what a particular sub-assembly looked like, since we were designing
>its replacement.
>I was a trifle perturbed, when he pulled out one of those classic Minox
>spy cameras and started taking photographs.

One in my desk drawer if anyone wants it.
>

--
Tim Lamb

Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:
>
> [1] Yes, I know I could use the phone to read books, but its screen is
> terrible for this purpose - when compared to the Paperwhite.
>
Exactly!! Smartphones are second best at everything, no good for
reading on, no good for taking pictures, no good for sending messages.
They are OK[ish] as phones.

--
Chris Green
·

Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> wrote:
> Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:
>>
>> [1] Yes, I know I could use the phone to read books, but its screen is
>> terrible for this purpose - when compared to the Paperwhite.
>>
> Exactly!! Smartphones are second best at everything, no good for
> reading on, no good for taking pictures, no good for sending messages.
> They are OK[ish] as phones.
>

Don’t be daft. Making calls is bottom of the list. They do a hundred other
things brilliantly.

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

On 19/11/2023 20:26, Chris Green wrote:
> Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:
>>
>> [1] Yes, I know I could use the phone to read books, but its screen is
>> terrible for this purpose - when compared to the Paperwhite.
>>
> Exactly!! Smartphones are second best at everything, no good for
> reading on, no good for taking pictures, no good for sending messages.
> They are OK[ish] as phones.
>
Goodness, you grumpy so and so. The camera in my Galaxy S10+ is not as
good as my Fuji XE-1 but it fits in my pocket and I don't need a second
bag. Its better than my pocket size Nikon. In manual mode it will do
quite a range of special effects, so long exposures for moving water,
high shutter speed for action shots.

I now seldom use a real camera. The pictures from my mobile are on my
laptop almost instantly via OneDrive, no messing with cards or USB leads.

Its really the only way to send Text messages. The SatNav is always up
to date. Before you say "won't work where there is no signal" if I
download the route before I start it will.

Dave

On 19 Nov 2023 at 20:50:08 GMT, "Tim+" <tim.downie@gmail.com> wrote:

> Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> wrote:
>> Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> [1] Yes, I know I could use the phone to read books, but its screen is
>>> terrible for this purpose - when compared to the Paperwhite.
>>>
>> Exactly!! Smartphones are second best at everything, no good for
>> reading on, no good for taking pictures, no good for sending messages.
>> They are OK[ish] as phones.
>
> Don’t be daft. Making calls is bottom of the list. They do a hundred other
> things brilliantly.

Not on mine they don't. I don't add apps to mine, I take them off. If a
smartphone cost thirty quid that would be one thing. But I object to spending
hundreds for one.

--
All of science is either physics or stamp-collecting.

Ernest Rutherford

On Sun, 19 Nov 2023 19:22:45 +0000, Tim Lamb wrote:

> In message <oJs6N.35476$Ee89.23952@fx17.iad>, Sam Plusnet <not@home.com>
> writes
>>On 18-Nov-23 9:15, David Wade wrote:
>>> On 18/11/2023 04:31, alan_m wrote:
>>>> On 17/11/2023 14:43, Theo wrote:
>>>>> Jeff Gaines <jgnewsid@outlook.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Any of you come across a smartphone without a camera?
>>>>>
>>>>> Only for those who need to go into secure military facilities etc,
>>>>>ie you're
>>>>> going to pay a premium and get a worse phone for it.  There are
>>>>>companies
>>>>> who will unsolder the camera from an existing phone for a hefty fee.
>>>>>
>>>>> (SOP for secure facilities is to require you to leave your phone in
>>>>>a locker
>>>>> in the guardpost, so most people don't need these)
>>>>
>>>> Possibly for high security no cameras and no audio recording devices.
>>>> A smartphone will fail both.
>>>>
>>> If its that secure, do they allow any phones at all. All phones can
>>>be used as a recording device. Simply ring your own voicemail...
>>> Also why would you need a phone in such a place? Probably also has
>>>faraday cages so won't work. If you need to make a call they will have
>>>a phone you can use.
>>> Any incoming to voice mail.....
>>> .... definitely sounds a niche requirement...
>>
>>Several years before mobile phones (even dumb ones) became a thing, I
>>visited a secure site with a much more senior colleague. We needed to
>>see what a particular sub-assembly looked like, since we were designing
>>its replacement.
>>I was a trifle perturbed, when he pulled out one of those classic Minox
>>spy cameras and started taking photographs.
>
> One in my desk drawer if anyone wants it.
>>

My son works for Konica Minolta and did acquire one of the early little
cameras (off eBay, I think). Haven't tried it yet.

--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

On Mon, 20 Nov 2023 05:55:00 +1100, Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:

> On 19-Nov-23 12:15, Chris Green wrote:
>> Andrew <Andrew97d@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>> On 18/11/2023 10:54, Chris Green wrote:
>>>> David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> On 18/11/2023 09:39, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Also as I said the Camera in the phone adds so much to the utility of
>>>>> the phone. I use my camera so often for simply noting things, like
>>>>> when
>>>>> seeing something in IKEA and noting its pickup bay.
>>>>>
>>>>> I do own a separate camera but its bulky to carry, its really only
>>>>> better for long telephoto shots (it has a super zoom lense) and its a
>>>>> faff getting the pictures onto my PC. Those from the phone come via
>>>>> OneDrive.
>>>>>
>>>> Panasonic TZ60 is the answer. I very rarely take my phone with me
>>>> because it's of very little use to me. I use a laptop when I need to
>>>> browse the internet, send messages, whatever. I use the TZ60 for
>>>> taking pictures, proper viewfinder, long telephoto when needed, as
>>>> handy (smaller even) than most modern smartphones.
>>>>
>>> "The DMC-TZ60 is a well-built camera with a high quality metal body
>>> that's covered in a tactile rubberised coating. "
>>>
>>> Its a 2014 model. Has the rubber coating gone sticky yet ?
>>>
>> Not that I've noticed! :-)
>> I think it's still being made and there's newer models in the same
>> family, e.g. TZ80.
>>
> I have the TZ70, and the body hasn't deteriorated in any way.
>
> That said, I can't recall ever using it since I got a phone with a
> decent camera on board. I already carry a phone and a Kindle
> Paperwhite[1] with me a lot of the time, so an extra gadget would be too
> much.
>
> [1] Yes, I know I could use the phone to read books, but its screen is
> terrible for this purpose - when compared to the Paperwhite.

I actually prefer the iphones, everything from the 5 to the 6S and now the
SE3.

More for their physical size, the paperwhite is too physically big for
me, both too big for my pockets and when actually reading an ebook.

Main downside is that the battery in the iphone doesnt last well enough
if you are using it to read ebooks all day. The paperwhite charge lasts
for far longer.

I am quite short sighted tho, so read everything without my glasses.

On Mon, 20 Nov 2023 07:26:39 +1100, Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> wrote:

> Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:
>>
>> [1] Yes, I know I could use the phone to read books, but its screen is
>> terrible for this purpose - when compared to the Paperwhite.
>>
> Exactly!! Smartphones are second best at everything, no good for
> reading on,

Wrong.

> no good for taking pictures,

Wrong, you clearly haven't used a current top of the line one.

> no good for sending messages.

Wrong.

> They are OK[ish] as phones.

Chris Green wrote:

> Smartphones are second best at everything

The point frequently being, for a multitude of tasks, they are the best
device you have with you.

On Mon, 20 Nov 2023 14:24:26 +1100, ken, better known as cantankerous
trolling senile geezer Rodent Speed, wrote:

<FLUSH the abnormal trolling senile cretin's latest trollshit unread>

--
Sqwertz to Rodent Speed:
"This is just a hunch, but I'm betting you're kinda an argumentative
asshole.
MID: <ev1p6ml7ywd5$.dlg@sqwertz.com>

On Mon, 20 Nov 2023 14:21:50 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

<FLUSH the abnormal trolling senile cretin's latest trollshit unread>

--
Richard addressing senile Rodent Speed:
"Shit you're thick/pathetic excuse for a troll."
MID: <ogoa38$pul$1@news.mixmin.net>

On 20/11/2023 08:58, Andy Burns wrote:
> Chris Green wrote:
>
>> Smartphones are second best at everything
>
> The point frequently being, for a multitude of tasks, they are the best
> device you have with you.
>
> C.f. a Swiss Army Knife, Leatherman or the like
--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

Graham. <graham-usenet@mail.com> wrote:
> I once stayed at a hotel abroad where there was the usual safe in room
> which you programmed with your own four digit code, only this one had the
> added feature of each key playing a different musical tone!

If your phone breaks you can use the safe as a dialler. But so can the
person in the room adjoining by paper thin walls...

Robin <rbw@outlook.com> wrote:
> On 20/11/2023 08:58, Andy Burns wrote:
> > Chris Green wrote:
> >
> >> Smartphones are second best at everything
> >
> > The point frequently being, for a multitude of tasks, they are the best
> > device you have with you.
> >
> > C.f. a Swiss Army Knife, Leatherman or the like

Yes, and personally I find them just as horrible! :-) One sees many
screws etc. that have been ruined by attempting to use one of the
above one them. It's rarely that I need tools when I'm not in my car
or on my 'bike, thus it's perfectly reasonable to have a good set of
tools with one.

--
Chris Green
·

David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> wrote:
> On 19/11/2023 20:26, Chris Green wrote:
> > Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> [1] Yes, I know I could use the phone to read books, but its screen is
> >> terrible for this purpose - when compared to the Paperwhite.
> >>
> > Exactly!! Smartphones are second best at everything, no good for
> > reading on, no good for taking pictures, no good for sending messages.
> > They are OK[ish] as phones.
> >
> Goodness, you grumpy so and so. The camera in my Galaxy S10+ is not as
> good as my Fuji XE-1 but it fits in my pocket and I don't need a second
> bag. Its better than my pocket size Nikon. In manual mode it will do
> quite a range of special effects, so long exposures for moving water,
> high shutter speed for action shots.
>
My Tz60 is smaller and lighter than a smartphone and has a proper
viewfinder and a 30:1 telephoto lens. Why would I lug my smartphone
around instead?

> I now seldom use a real camera. The pictures from my mobile are on my
> laptop almost instantly via OneDrive, no messing with cards or USB leads.
>
The Tz60 can use WiFi but I prefer a piece of wire. :-)

> Its really the only way to send Text messages. The SatNav is always up
> to date. Before you say "won't work where there is no signal" if I
> download the route before I start it will.
>
Text messages I mostly send from my laptop, far easier with a proper
keyboard.

--
Chris Green
·

Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
> Chris Green wrote:
>
> > Smartphones are second best at everything
>
> The point frequently being, for a multitude of tasks, they are the best
> device you have with you.
>
But I don't, I have my (smaller) camera and probably a laptop.

--
Chris Green
·

On 20/11/2023 12:04, Chris Green wrote:
> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>> Chris Green wrote:
>>
>>> Smartphones are second best at everything
>>
>> The point frequently being, for a multitude of tasks, they are the best
>> device you have with you.
>>
> But I don't, I have my (smaller) camera and probably a laptop.

But do you have those every time you walk to the local shops? If you see
something interesting, you are far more likely to have your phone with you.

Chris Green wrote:

> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>> Chris Green wrote:
>>
>>> Smartphones are second best at everything
>>
>> The point frequently being, for a multitude of tasks, they are the best
>> device you have with you.
>>
> But I don't, I have my (smaller) camera and probably a laptop.

If I'm going somewhere that requires good photos, I'll take a camera; if
I'm going somewhere that will be dark, I'll take some form of torch; if
I know I'll need to work from an oddball location, I'll take a mifi;

But for times when I haven't taken any of the above, my phone can step
in ...

SteveW <steve@walker-family.me.uk> wrote:
> On 20/11/2023 12:04, Chris Green wrote:
> > Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
> >> Chris Green wrote:
> >>
> >>> Smartphones are second best at everything
> >>
> >> The point frequently being, for a multitude of tasks, they are the best
> >> device you have with you.
> >>
> > But I don't, I have my (smaller) camera and probably a laptop.
>
> But do you have those every time you walk to the local shops? If you see
> something interesting, you are far more likely to have your phone with you.
>
I carry my camera much more frequently than my smartphone. The laptop
always travels with me (car, 'bike).

--
Chris Green
·

On 20/11/2023 13:20, Chris Green wrote:
> SteveW <steve@walker-family.me.uk> wrote:
>> On 20/11/2023 12:04, Chris Green wrote:
>>> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>>>> Chris Green wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Smartphones are second best at everything
>>>>
>>>> The point frequently being, for a multitude of tasks, they are the best
>>>> device you have with you.
>>>>
>>> But I don't, I have my (smaller) camera and probably a laptop.
>>
>> But do you have those every time you walk to the local shops? If you see
>> something interesting, you are far more likely to have your phone with you.
>>
> I carry my camera much more frequently than my smartphone. The laptop
> always travels with me (car, 'bike).

Fair enough, but most people carry their phone with them almost all the
time, in or out of the house. For most people the phone will be the
camera that they have on them if they see something interesting, they
want to take photos of the scene after they are involved in an accident,
or whaterver.