Jerry <Jerry@JerryThinks.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Jan 2023 22:12:55 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
>
>> Sharing photos or cloud storage or paid apps or media subscriptions.
>
> How much is 128GB of iCloud storage rented for the life of an iPhone?
> How much is a 128GB sd card storage for a typical Android phone life?

How does one share an SD card's storage with family members?

Am 04.01.23 um 03:42 schrieb nospam:
> In article <tp2m4c$1g59$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Chris Schram
> <chrispam1@me.com> wrote:
>
>>>
>>> mayayana's claim that iphones cost 'thousands of dollars' or whatever
>>> price he said is simply bullshit. even the carrier he uses sells one
>>> for $189.
>>
>> Can I get that $190 iPhone right now or not?
>
> anyone can.
>
> whether you personally can figure out what to do is questionable.
>
>> If I can't get it without changing anything on my plan, tell me how.
>
> this isn't about you, and you're continuing to dig yourself a deeper
> hole.

What else do you expect from Arlen/Burnelli?

--
Gutta cavat lapidem (Ovid)

On Wed, 04 Jan 2023 13:00:58 +1100, Jerry <Jerry@jerrythinks.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 3 Jan 2023 15:15:25 -0800, Alan wrote:
>
>>> How much is 128GB of iCloud storage rented for the life of an iPhone?
>> $4/month gets you 200GB.
>
> The topic is cost of photo storage between iPhone and Android for the
> lifetime of the phone.

> The iPhone photo storage is MUCH more expensive than Android storage.

Bullshit.

> $48/year for 3 years

That isnt the only way to do iphone photo storage.

> is about $150 for that 200GB of iPhone photo storage.

Pity that isnt the only way to do iphone photo storage.

> A 200GB Sandisk sdcard on Amazon (first hit) is $27 today.
> https://www.amazon.com/SanDisk-200GB-microSDXC-Memory-Adapter/dp/B08HCHS64Y/

Perfectly possible to use that for your iphone photo storage.

> That iPhone photo storage is about 5 times more expensive than for
> Android.

Bullshit given that it is perfectly possible to use the
200GB Sandisk sdcard for your iphone photo storage.

On Wed, 04 Jan 2023 13:04:28 +1100, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

> On 2023-01-03 17:00, chop wrote:
>> On Wed, 04 Jan 2023 08:40:35 +1100, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2023-01-03 13:25, Your Name wrote:
>>>> On 2023-01-03 21:11:09 +0000, Alan said:
>>>>> On 2023-01-03 05:20, Mayayana wrote:
>>>>>> I don't generally use apps and mostly just keep a cellphone on-hand,
>>>>>> not powered up, for when I need to make a phone call away from home.
>>>>>
>>>>> And if someone needs to call you...
>>>>>
>>>>> ...because it's urgent...
>>>>>
>>>>> ...and you keep your cell phone turned off?
>>>>>
>>>>> That's about as stupid an idea as I have ever heard.
>>>> This will make you happy then ... I've never had a mobile phone of
>>>> any kind, and probably never will. I don't see any point at all in
>>>> *me* having one - it's simply yet another unnecessary on-going
>>>> expense paying out to greedy telecoms companies.
>>>>
>>>
>>> That makes me completely happy.
>>>
>>> Not having mobile phone at all is a valid choice.
>>>
>>> Having one, paying for it...
>>>
>>> ...but not taking full advantage of what you're paying for is just
>>> stupid.
>> Not if you don't want people calling you and do find the phone
>> useful in an emergency or even something simple like the car
>> stopping working.
>
> So you don't seem to be aware that you can put the phone on silent / do
> not disturb.

Then you need to get your seems machinery seen to, BAD.

I do in fact do that twice most days, when I am sleeping.

> Interesting.

Fraid not.

On Wed, 04 Jan 2023 13:05:17 +1100, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

> On 2023-01-03 18:00, Jerry wrote:
>> On Tue, 3 Jan 2023 15:15:25 -0800, Alan wrote:
>>
>>>> How much is 128GB of iCloud storage rented for the life of an iPhone?
>>>
>>> $4/month gets you 200GB.
>> The topic is cost of photo storage between iPhone and Android for the
>> lifetime of the phone.
>> The iPhone photo storage is MUCH more expensive than Android storage.
>> $48/year for 3 years is about $150 for that 200GB of iPhone photo
>> storage.
>> A 200GB Sandisk sdcard on Amazon (first hit) is $27 today.
>> https://www.amazon.com/SanDisk-200GB-microSDXC-Memory-Adapter/dp/B08HCHS64Y/
>> That iPhone photo storage is about 5 times more expensive than for
>> Android.
>
> But you get a benefit you don't get with an SD card:
>
> A backup of your data.

An SD card does that too.

On Wed, 04 Jan 2023 18:02:07 +1100, Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> wrote:

> Am 03.01.23 um 23:12 schrieb Chris:
>> Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> wrote:
>>> Am 03.01.23 um 21:51 schrieb Chris:
>>>> There's more to it than chatting.
>>>
>>> E-Mail? Phone calls? Everything platform-agnostic.
>>> Tell us a little more we don't know yet.
>>
>> Sharing photos or cloud storage or paid apps or media subscriptions.
>
> There are a lot of platform-independent solutions for exactly these
> functions.

Not with paid apps.

On Wed, 04 Jan 2023 18:04:04 +1100, Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> wrote:

> Am 04.01.23 um 08:02 schrieb Joerg Lorenz:
>> Am 03.01.23 um 23:12 schrieb Chris:
>>> Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> wrote:
>>>> Am 03.01.23 um 21:51 schrieb Chris:
>>>>> There's more to it than chatting.
>>>>
>>>> E-Mail? Phone calls? Everything platform-agnostic.
>>>> Tell us a little more we don't know yet.
>>>
>>> Sharing photos or cloud storage or paid apps or media subscriptions.
>>
>> There are a lot of platform-independent solutions for exactly these
>> functions.
>
> BTW: I use them because I use a Pixel 7 and an iPhone 14 with services
> from two different providers.

How do you find the Pixel 7 overheating wise ?

Mate of mine has a Pixel 6 Pro which is fucking useless overheating wise.
It shuts down when videoing and using the phonewith temps in the high
20Cs and given that he wasnt prepared to fuck google over and demand
a full cash refund and only got a google credit, is about to try a Pixel 7
Pro.

Lots of people with a shutdown with the phone howling about overheating
with google.

On Wed, 04 Jan 2023 18:34:51 +1100, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:

> Jerry <Jerry@JerryThinks.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 3 Jan 2023 22:12:55 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
>>
>>> Sharing photos or cloud storage or paid apps or media subscriptions.
>>
>> How much is 128GB of iCloud storage rented for the life of an iPhone?
>> How much is a 128GB sd card storage for a typical Android phone life?
>
> How does one share an SD card's storage with family members?

By uploading its contents to a cloud, stupid.

Am 03.01.23 um 22:11 schrieb Alan:
> On 2023-01-03 05:20, Mayayana wrote:
>> I don't generally use apps and mostly just keep a cellphone on-hand,
>> not powered up, for when I need to make a phone call away from home.
>
> And if someone needs to call you...
>
> ...because it's urgent...
>
> ...and you keep your cell phone turned off?
>
> That's about as stupid an idea as I have ever heard.

*+1*

--
Gutta cavat lapidem (Ovid)

Jerry <Jerry@JerryThinks.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Jan 2023 15:15:25 -0800, Alan wrote:
>
>>> How much is 128GB of iCloud storage rented for the life of an iPhone?
>>
>> $4/month gets you 200GB.
>
> The topic is cost of photo storage between iPhone and Android for the
> lifetime of the phone.

No. This sub-thread is about sharing services with family (or close
friends) within and across platforms.

> The iPhone photo storage is MUCH more expensive than Android storage.
> $48/year for 3 years is about $150 for that 200GB of iPhone photo storage.
>
> A 200GB Sandisk sdcard on Amazon (first hit) is $27 today.
> https://www.amazon.com/SanDisk-200GB-microSDXC-Memory-Adapter/dp/B08HCHS64Y/
>
> That iPhone photo storage is about 5 times more expensive than for Android.

You're not comparing like with like. An SD card is not the same as cloud
storage - even on Android.

In the UK icloud 200GB is £2.49 pm. Google drive is also £2.49 pm for
200GB. No difference.

On Wed, 4 Jan 2023 12:12:45 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:

>> The topic is cost of photo storage between iPhone and Android for the
>> lifetime of the phone.
>
> No. This sub-thread is about sharing services with family (or close
> friends) within and across platforms.

OK. I'll step out as I was just saying that iPhone photo storage is always
five to ten times more expensive than Android photo storage because Apple
designed it that way.

For one, you can't even get 200MB of $27 sd card storage on the iPhone.
For another, 200MB of iPhone storage costs $150 over the iPhone's life.

That additional $150 - $25 (using rough numbers) has to be always added to
the cost of every iPhone if the user wishes to store that amount of photos.

>
>> The iPhone photo storage is MUCH more expensive than Android storage.
>> $48/year for 3 years is about $150 for that 200GB of iPhone photo storage.
>>
>> A 200GB Sandisk sdcard on Amazon (first hit) is $27 today.
>> https://www.amazon.com/SanDisk-200GB-microSDXC-Memory-Adapter/dp/B08HCHS64Y/
>>
>> That iPhone photo storage is about 5 times more expensive than for Android.
>
> You're not comparing like with like. An SD card is not the same as cloud
> storage - even on Android.

No. You're wrong. You don't seem to understand sd card storage at all.
For you to equate sd storage with cloud storage is not accurate.
They're completely different.

Apple wants you to THINK they're the same.
But they're completely different.

If all you want is 200MB of photo storage, then the sd card works perfect.
On Android.

It's removable also.
And transferable to a computer or another phone.
Without needing the cloud.

But only on Android.
It doesn't work at all on iOS.

If all you want is 200MB of storage on an iPhone, then you're going to have
to pay through the nose for that, which is exactly how Apple designed it.

How you get that 200MB for photo storage is up to you but Apple designed it
to be five to ten times more expensive than just using an sd card would be.

When you're comparing cost of ownership, the iPhone will always have a far
greater cost of ownership for storage that has to be added into the math.

Apple designed it to be that way.

>
> In the UK icloud 200GB is �2.49 pm. Google drive is also �2.49 pm for
> 200GB. No difference.

You do not understand photo storage if you are saying that the iCloud is
the same choice as using any cloud storage solution (because it's not).

They're different solutions.
Both solutions are available to Android owners.

But Apple designed the iPhone to NOT have an sd card solution at all.

If all you want is 200MB of photo storage, for an Android phone it's $27.
If all you want is 200MB of photo storage, for iPhone it's much more $$$.

Because Apple designed photo storage to be five to ten times more expensive
on the iPhone, then you MUST account for that in the total ownership costs.

On Wed, 4 Jan 2023 07:34:51 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:

> How does one share an SD card's storage with family members?

You do not seem to have any practical experience with use of sd cards.

Sharing sd card storage is trivial on Android.
It's impossible on iOS.

Because Apple designed photo storage to be five to ten times more expensive
on the iPhone, then you MUST account for that in the total ownership costs.

On 2023-01-04, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>> Can I get that $190 iPhone right now or not?
>
> anyone can.
>
> whether you personally can figure out what to do is questionable.

What you are trying to do by insulting me is you're trying to avoid
answering that a legion of your cherry picked ridiculously complex set of
hassles and scrounging for free accessories are REQUIRED in order for
iPhone math to come close to what you need it to be to compare to Android.

The iPhone will always be much more expensive in overall costs than Android
(whether you look at the averages or even if you choose only one market).

The causes are many but the key reason is that Apple designed it that way.

Chris Schram <chrispam1@me.com> wrote:
> The iPhone will always be much more expensive in overall costs than Android

And a BMW will always be much more expensive in overall costs than a Chevy.

So what’s your point?

What the stupid troll kiddies don’t understand is that those who can afford
the more expensive choice don’t give a damn about “total cost of
ownership”.

I’m sure there are nut jobs on BMW newsgroups claiming that a Chevy is just
as good as a BMW too.

Even for you retarded troll kiddies, this is an absurd topic. But hey,
thanks for pointing out that the better product actually costs more.
That’s SUCH a new concept that we were completely unaware of.

Androidiots indeed. 🙄

On Thu, 05 Jan 2023 03:04:24 +1100, Jerry <Jerry@jerrythinks.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 4 Jan 2023 07:34:51 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
>
>> How does one share an SD card's storage with family members?
>
> You do not seem to have any practical experience with use of sd cards.
>
> Sharing sd card storage is trivial on Android.
> It's impossible on iOS.

Bullshit it is. Plenty of sd adapters that use the lightning port.

> Because Apple designed photo storage to be five to ten times more
> expensive
> on the iPhone,

More bullshit.

> then you MUST account for that in the total ownership costs.

More bullshit.

On 2023-01-04 01:02, chop wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Jan 2023 13:04:28 +1100, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2023-01-03 17:00, chop wrote:
>>> On Wed, 04 Jan 2023 08:40:35 +1100, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2023-01-03 13:25, Your Name wrote:
>>>>> On 2023-01-03 21:11:09 +0000, Alan said:
>>>>>> On 2023-01-03 05:20, Mayayana wrote:
>>>>>>> I don't generally use apps and mostly just keep a cellphone on-hand,
>>>>>>> not powered up, for when I need to make a phone call away from home.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And if someone needs to call you...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ...because it's urgent...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ...and you keep your cell phone turned off?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's about as stupid an idea as I have ever heard.
>>>>>  This will make you happy then ... I've never had a mobile phone of
>>>>> any kind, and probably never will. I don't see any point at all in
>>>>> *me* having one - it's simply yet another unnecessary on-going
>>>>> expense paying out to greedy telecoms companies.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That makes me completely happy.
>>>>
>>>> Not having mobile phone at all is a valid choice.
>>>>
>>>> Having one, paying for it...
>>>>
>>>> ...but not taking full advantage of what you're paying for is just
>>>> stupid.
>>>  Not if you don't want people calling you and do find the phone
>>> useful in an emergency or even something simple like the car
>>> stopping working.
>>
>> So you don't seem to be aware that you can put the phone on silent /
>> do not disturb.
>
> Then you need to get your seems machinery seen to, BAD.
>
> I do in fact do that twice most days, when I am sleeping.

Then what was the bullshit about not having it turned on being the way
to handle not wanting people calling you?

>
>> Interesting.
>
> Fraid not.

On 2023-01-04 01:03, chop wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Jan 2023 13:05:17 +1100, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2023-01-03 18:00, Jerry wrote:
>>> On Tue, 3 Jan 2023 15:15:25 -0800, Alan wrote:
>>>
>>>>> How much is 128GB of iCloud storage rented for the life of an iPhone?
>>>>
>>>> $4/month gets you 200GB.
>>>  The topic is cost of photo storage between iPhone and Android for the
>>> lifetime of the phone.
>>> The iPhone photo storage is MUCH more expensive than Android storage.
>>> $48/year for 3 years is about $150 for that 200GB of iPhone photo
>>> storage.
>>>  A 200GB Sandisk sdcard on Amazon (first hit) is $27 today.
>>> https://www.amazon.com/SanDisk-200GB-microSDXC-Memory-Adapter/dp/B08HCHS64Y/
>>>  That iPhone photo storage is about 5 times more expensive than for
>>> Android.
>>
>> But you get a benefit you don't get with an SD card:
>>
>> A backup of your data.
>
> An SD card does that too.

Nope.

If you're using an SD card as the primary store for anything, then you
need at least one more storage medium to call it a back up.

An SD card IN the phone will get lost or stolen right along WITH the phone.

On 2023-01-04 08:04, Jerry wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jan 2023 07:34:51 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
>
>> How does one share an SD card's storage with family members?
>
> You do not seem to have any practical experience with use of sd cards.
>
> Sharing sd card storage is trivial on Android.
> It's impossible on iOS.
>
> Because Apple designed photo storage to be five to ten times more expensive
> on the iPhone, then you MUST account for that in the total ownership costs.

You're not seriously proposing that passing around an SD card is an
efficient way to share photos, are you?

In article <fjudnXuOTMygKyj-nZ2dnZfqn_WdnZ2d@supernews.com>, Bob
Campbell <nunya@none.none> wrote:

>
> What the stupid troll kiddies don¹t understand is that those who can afford
> the more expensive choice don¹t give a damn about ³total cost of
> ownership².

not only that, but few people pay for the phone outright. they usually
finance it, with the difference being a few dollars a month.

> I¹m sure there are nut jobs on BMW newsgroups claiming that a Chevy is just
> as good as a BMW too.

everyone knows that yugo is the best, with the lowest cost of ownership
too.

> Even for you retarded troll kiddies, this is an absurd topic. But hey,
> thanks for pointing out that the better product actually costs more.
> That¹s SUCH a new concept that we were completely unaware of.

that's crazy-talk. are you sure that's true? i had never heard of it
until now.

nospam wrote:

>> What the stupid troll kiddies don't understand is that those who can afford
>> the more expensive choice dont give a damn about total cost of
>> ownership.
>
> not only that, but few people pay for the phone outright. they usually
> finance it, with the difference being a few dollars a month.

Both those sentiments are near sighted but both have some truth to them.
<https://i.postimg.cc/G3yPJjmj/clipboard01.jpg>

Bob Campbell buys his iPhone only to "look pretty", so Bob Campbell thinks
(erroneously so) that he is superior because he can "afford" to waste his
money (which is his prerogative but it's not something to be proud of).

Bob Campbell is proud of his dumb decision - purely due to its cost alone.

To many people who are smarter than Bob Campbell is, it's their prerogative
to buy the best phone they can buy, which will almost never be an iPhone.

Every once in a while an iPhone might come out with a decent camera, for
example, but within weeks the iPhone will be completely off the best list.

It's actually laughable how poorly designed an iPhone is in terms of the
functionality iOS lacks that _every_ other operating system already has.

The iPhone excels at nothing.
If it did, someone would prove me wrong.

But they can't.
Because the iPhone isn't continually the best at anything at all.

The only thing Apple is the best at is advertising the iPhone.
Nothing else.

As for paying for the iPhone outright, there is only a shred of truth in
what nospam thinks because nospam is ignoring the carriers' plan, which
often (but not always) takes into account the cost of that iPhone.

For example, my carrier gave me a handful of Android phones for free,
without any strings attached, and no contract change other than if I don't
hold on to them for two years I'd have to pay what's remaining (which is
fair).

However, I had to purchase my iPhones at cost, with only a tradein for my
old iPhone, which means the total cost of the iPhone is vastly greater.
<https://i.postimg.cc/8CdRfDFn/my-iphone.jpg>

It's always that way.
*Total cost of iPhones will always be astronomically more than Android.*

>
>> I�m sure there are nut jobs on BMW newsgroups claiming that a Chevy is just
>> as good as a BMW too.
>
> everyone knows that yugo is the best, with the lowest cost of ownership
> too.

Just as it would be ridiculous to claim the cost of ownership of a bimmer
is less than that of a yugo simply based on resale value alone, it's just
as ridiculous the arguments that Steve and nospam are claiming for Apple.

The iPhone is _designed_ by Apple to cost more than Android from the start.

Why do you think there are no sd card slots for God's sake?
Don't you iKooks understand _anything_ about Apple's marketing strategies?

The iPhone will always be astronomically more expensive to maintain.
Period.

Even with all the crazy assumptions that both nospam and Steve are making
just to get the cost down to something that isn't astronomical (e.g., they
are assuming the phone is free, and the accessories are free, etc.), even
then, the cost of _maintaining_ an iPhone is almost always more than
Android.

In fact, most people who buy an iPhone are so afraid of it that they buy
the extremely expensive good-for-nothing AppleCare plan, while I'd wager
that most Android owners don't even _need_ that stupidly expensive type of
insurance plan.

I certainly don't.

Only an idiot buys insurance for something they can easily replace.
The insurance companies prey on idiots like you iKooks always are.

They know the math better than you low-IQ ill-educated iKooks do.

You'll pay more overall for that laughable insurance than if you just
trusted that Apple built the phone not to self destruct in a few months.

>
>> Even for you retarded troll kiddies, this is an absurd topic. But hey,
>> thanks for pointing out that the better product actually costs more.
>> That's SUCH a new concept that we were completely unaware of.
>
> that's crazy-talk. are you sure that's true? i had never heard of it
> until now.

You both have no education.
You both have a low IQ.

So you can be forgiven that you dumbly equate price with quality.
Without even a _single_ quality metric in your personal calculations.

It's always the case with you iKooks:
a. You have a low IQ
b. You have no education

So you dumbly equate price with quality, with no questions asked.
That's pretty dumb.

What's interesting is due to the low IQ and lack of education of the
iKooks, which is that they equate price to quality, a priori.

There's _nothing_ the iPhone is better at that isn't already in Android.
Nothing.

If there was, you iKooks could elucidate what that is.
And you never do.

Because you can't.

What's funny is you iKooks have such a low IQ that you don't even realize
that you can't back up even a single on of your imaginary belief systems.

For example, name one thing that the iPhone can do that Android can't.
*Name just one*
--
Notice they can't do that, and yet they equated price with quality.

On 04/01/2023 19:8, Alan wrote:

> An SD card IN the phone will get lost or stolen right along WITH the phone.

Your claim is ridiculously short sighted out of your ignorance of sd cards.

Do you really not know how easy it is to copy sd to any pc or flash drive?

There has to be about 10 ways to do it, none of which are at all difficult.

On Wed, 04 Jan 2023 19:59:45 +1100, chop wrote:

>> The iPhone photo storage is MUCH more expensive than Android storage.
>
> Bullshit.

You can say bullshit but you can't back it up so it's you who bullshits.
Every comment from you reeks of lack of understanding of photo storage.

>
>> $48/year for 3 years
>
> That isnt the only way to do iphone photo storage.

Why did you think anyone said it was?
Are you stupid?

If you're not stupid, then you'd have realized nobody said it was.

>
>> is about $150 for that 200GB of iPhone photo storage.
>
> Pity that isnt the only way to do iphone photo storage.

You are the only one saying it's the only way.

Why?
Because it's _you_ who is stupid.

Nobody (but you) claimed it's the "only way" to store photos.
You need to bone up on how the iPhone/Android camera apps store photos.

>
>> A 200GB Sandisk sdcard on Amazon (first hit) is $27 today.
>> https://www.amazon.com/SanDisk-200GB-microSDXC-Memory-Adapter/dp/B08HCHS64Y/
>
> Perfectly possible to use that for your iphone photo storage.

All your comments simply show that you're stupid.

You don't even realize the iPhone saves photos to the internal storage.
Meanwhile, Android is typically set to save photos to sd card storage.

Big difference in cost.
It's one of the reasons the iPhone is always more expensive in every way.

>
>> That iPhone photo storage is about 5 times more expensive than for
>> Android.
>
> Bullshit given that it is perfectly possible to use the
> 200GB Sandisk sdcard for your iphone photo storage.

Apparently, from your comments, you are unaware of how the iPhone works.
And you are unaware of how the Android phone works too.

At least in terms of where iPhone/Android cameras initially save photos.

The iPhone saves to (expensive & nonremovable) internal storage.
The Android saves photos to (inexpensive & removable) sdcard storage.

Please bone up on how the iPhone and Android camera apps work.
If you don't say stupid things, I won't respond that you're stupid.

Instead, say smart intelligent things when/if you reply.

On Thu, 05 Jan 2023 04:48:44 +1100, chop wrote:

>> Sharing sd card storage is trivial on Android.
>> It's impossible on iOS.
>
> Bullshit it is. Plenty of sd adapters that use the lightning port.

Everything you don't understand, you call bullshit.

Do you even realize that the iPhone saves the photos to internal storage?
That's expensive internal storage.
That's non-removable internal storage.

Do you realize that most Androids save the photo to external storage?
That's inexpensive external storage.
That's removable external storage.

Why do you think Apple never gave iPhone owners this common option?
Why do you think Apple makes it so easy to sync photos to the iCloud?
Why do you think Apple gave you a meager amount of free iCloud space?

Do you know anything about Apple?
Or do you just want to call everything bullshit that you don't understand?

>
>> Because Apple designed photo storage to be five to ten times more
>> expensive
>> on the iPhone,
>
> More bullshit.

You call everything that you can't understand, bullshit.

You have no idea that internal storage costs more than external storage.
You don't even understand how iPhones store photos initially.
Worse, you don't understand how Android phones store photos initially.

Everything you don't understand, you call bullshit.

>
>> then you MUST account for that in the total ownership costs.
>
> More bullshit.

When you don't understand something, you call it bullshit.
In your mind, by calling everything you don't understand bullshit, that
means (in your mind) you can continue to never understand it.

What you don't understand is how the iPhone stores photos initially.
And you don't understand how most Androids store photos initially.

You don't understand the cost of that media for the iPhone.
And you don't understand the cost of that media for Android.

Hence you call it bullshit.
That way you can continue to never understand a word that was said.

If you respond, please indicate that you understand how an iPhone camera
app initially stores photos and likewise, how most Android camera apps do.

On Wed, 4 Jan 2023 10:10:01 -0800, Alan wrote:

>> Because Apple designed photo storage to be five to ten times more expensive
>> on the iPhone, then you MUST account for that in the total ownership costs.
>
> You're not seriously proposing that passing around an SD card is an
> efficient way to share photos, are you?

How did you NOT understand a single word that anyone said about this?

How does NOT having an sd card on the iPhone make it any easier to "pass
around" photos than it is to have that sd card & choice of other options?

To dumb it down to words you can understand, having 2 arms (Android) is
always better than having only 1 arm (iPhone) in terms of what you can do.

How did you _miss_ that?
Are you stupid?

On Thu, 05 Jan 2023 05:07:46 +1100, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

> On 2023-01-04 01:02, chop wrote:
>> On Wed, 04 Jan 2023 13:04:28 +1100, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2023-01-03 17:00, chop wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 04 Jan 2023 08:40:35 +1100, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2023-01-03 13:25, Your Name wrote:
>>>>>> On 2023-01-03 21:11:09 +0000, Alan said:
>>>>>>> On 2023-01-03 05:20, Mayayana wrote:
>>>>>>>> I don't generally use apps and mostly just keep a cellphone
>>>>>>>> on-hand,
>>>>>>>> not powered up, for when I need to make a phone call away from
>>>>>>>> home.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And if someone needs to call you...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ...because it's urgent...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ...and you keep your cell phone turned off?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That's about as stupid an idea as I have ever heard.
>>>>>> This will make you happy then ... I've never had a mobile phone of
>>>>>> any kind, and probably never will. I don't see any point at all in
>>>>>> *me* having one - it's simply yet another unnecessary on-going
>>>>>> expense paying out to greedy telecoms companies.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> That makes me completely happy.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not having mobile phone at all is a valid choice.
>>>>>
>>>>> Having one, paying for it...
>>>>>
>>>>> ...but not taking full advantage of what you're paying for is just
>>>>> stupid.
>>>> Not if you don't want people calling you and do find the phone
>>>> useful in an emergency or even something simple like the car
>>>> stopping working.
>>>
>>> So you don't seem to be aware that you can put the phone on silent /
>>> do not disturb.
>> Then you need to get your seems machinery seen to, BAD.
>> I do in fact do that twice most days, when I am sleeping.
>
> Then what was the bullshit about not having it turned on being the way
> to handle not wanting people calling you?

I never said that. I ACTUALLY said that if you find the phone
useful in an emergency or even something simple like the car
stopping working and dont want people calling you, it can
make sense to turn it off when it isnt an emergency or the
car not working so that you don't have to charge it every day.

>>
>>> Interesting.
>> Fraid not.