Ken Blake wrote:

>> nospam wrote:
>>while folding would make it smaller, the benefit is minimal for
>>something the size of a phone, which already fits in a pocket.
>
> If you want to think double the screen size is a minimal benefit,
> that's your prerogative. I obviously disagree, and strongly..

It's classic for nospam to have only 7 excuses for why his beloved iPhone
can't do the simplest of things that Android phones already easily do.

One of those 7 excuses nospam always pulls out of his ass is this claim:
*Nobody Wants It*

It's a classic nospam excuse for why Apple can't innovate on the iPhone.

In this case, nospam's claim is nobody wants any smart phone that is half
the size in your pocket but double the screen size when you need it to be.

On 2022-11-05 08:41, Andy Burnelli wrote:
> Ken Blake wrote:
>
>>> nospam wrote:
>>> while folding would make it smaller, the benefit is minimal for
>>> something the size of a phone, which already fits in a pocket.
>>
>> If you want to think double the screen size is a minimal benefit,
>> that's your prerogative. I obviously disagree, and strongly..
>
> It's classic for nospam to have only 7 excuses for why his beloved iPhone
> can't do the simplest of things that Android phones already easily do.

You think Apple CAN'T make a folding phone the equal of what has been
released?

You think they already HAVEN'T?

How naive.

On Sat, 5 Nov 2022 09:20:44 -0700, Alan wrote:

>> It's classic for nospam to have only 7 excuses for why his beloved iPhone
>> can't do the simplest of things that Android phones already easily do.
>
> You think Apple CAN'T make a folding phone the equal of what has been
> released?

On that note, tell us why Apple can't make an Apple Silicon 5G modem "the
equal of what has been released" by Samsung, MediaTek, Huawei and Qualcomm.

In article <tk6709$19ud$1@gioia.aioe.org>, soyon <soyon@soyon.biz>
wrote:

>
> On that note, tell us why Apple can't make an Apple Silicon 5G modem "the
> equal of what has been released" by Samsung, MediaTek, Huawei and Qualcomm.

why can't qualcomm make a processor the equal of what has been released
by apple?

different companies focus on different things. this is not complicated,
even for trolls.

In article <tk62gs$2hmob$1@dont-email.me>, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

> >>> while folding would make it smaller, the benefit is minimal for
> >>> something the size of a phone, which already fits in a pocket.
> >>
> >> If you want to think double the screen size is a minimal benefit,
> >> that's your prerogative. I obviously disagree, and strongly..
> >
> > It's classic for nospam to have only 7 excuses for why his beloved iPhone
> > can't do the simplest of things that Android phones already easily do.
>
> You think Apple CAN'T make a folding phone the equal of what has been
> released?

of course they 'can', it's that they don't want to because the folding
phones that have been released so far (and many more that haven't)
aren't particularly good.

On Nov 05, 2022, nospam wrote (in article
<news:051120221350268624%nospam@nospam.invalid>):

>> You think Apple CAN'T make a folding phone the equal of what has been
>> released?
>
> of course they 'can', it's that they don't want to because the folding
> phones that have been released so far (and many more that haven't)
> aren't particularly good.

Samsung's ad is wrong.

Of course Apple 'can' integrate a modem into their soc.
They just don't want to.

Samsung's ad is correct.

All phones with soc integration 'aren't particularly good' you say.
Apple can't figure out why anyone would integrate anything into an soc.

Apple bought that screen from samsung & Apple bought that cpu from arm &
Apple bought that modem from qualcomm *because* Apple can't innovate.

On 05-11-2022 23:20 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> why can't qualcomm make a processor the equal of what has been released
> by apple?

Does Qualcomm buy their smartphone CPU technology from ARM like Apple does?
Samsung focused on hardware innovation where it counts. Screen real estate.

>
> different companies focus on different things.

If Apple focuses on hardware innovation, where's the iPhone hardware
innovation when their iPhone CPU comes from one innovator, the screen from
another innovator, the modem from yet another innovator, etc.

What iPhone hardware innovation did Apple completely design without buying
the underlying innovation from an actual hardware innovation company?

Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
> Ken Blake wrote:
>
>>> nospam wrote:
>>> while folding would make it smaller, the benefit is minimal for
>>> something the size of a phone, which already fits in a pocket.
>>
>> If you want to think double the screen size is a minimal benefit,
>> that's your prerogative. I obviously disagree, and strongly..
>
> It's classic for nospam to have only 7 excuses for why his beloved iPhone
> can't do the simplest of things that Android phones already easily do.
>
> One of those 7 excuses nospam always pulls out of his ass is this claim:
> *Nobody Wants It*
>
> It's a classic nospam excuse for why Apple can't innovate on the iPhone.
>
> In this case, nospam's claim is nobody wants any smart phone that is half
> the size in your pocket but double the screen size when you need it to be.
>

My 83 year-old stepfather wanted the Samsung folding phone so much he gave
up the Apple 6+ which he had since it was new. I had to try and teach him
how to use it and found it frustrating myself, mostly because I’m used to
iOS and found Android to be unintuitive, but that’s just my experience.

The phone folded in half, but it was also way too thick and bulky when put
in a pocket. Personally I would not want it.

In article <tk6agg$eqjs$1@solani.org>, mike <this@address.is.invalid>
wrote:

>
> > why can't qualcomm make a processor the equal of what has been released
> > by apple?
>
> Does Qualcomm buy their smartphone CPU technology from ARM like Apple does?

as you've been repeatedly told, apple doesn't do that.

apple has an architectural license, which means they can design
whatever they want, and they do.

On 2022-11-05 11:25, Bill W wrote:
> On Nov 05, 2022, nospam wrote (in article
> <news:051120221350268624%nospam@nospam.invalid>):
>
>>> You think Apple CAN'T make a folding phone the equal of what has been
>>> released?
>>
>> of course they 'can', it's that they don't want to because the folding
>> phones that have been released so far (and many more that haven't)
>> aren't particularly good.
>
> Samsung's ad is wrong.
>
> Of course Apple 'can' integrate a modem into their soc.
> They just don't want to.
>
> Samsung's ad is correct.
>
> All phones with soc integration 'aren't particularly good' you say.
> Apple can't figure out why anyone would integrate anything into an soc.
>
> Apple bought that screen from samsung & Apple bought that cpu from arm &
> Apple bought that modem from qualcomm *because* Apple can't innovate.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!

Apple hasn't bought a CPU from ARM for more than a decade!

On 2022-11-05 11:37, mike wrote:
> On 05-11-2022 23:20 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
>> why can't qualcomm make a processor the equal of what has been released
>> by apple?
>
> Does Qualcomm buy their smartphone CPU technology from ARM like Apple does?

Apple doesn't buy their technology from ARM.

> Samsung focused on hardware innovation where it counts. Screen real estate.
>
>>
>> different companies focus on different things.
>
> If Apple focuses on hardware innovation, where's the iPhone hardware
> innovation when their iPhone CPU comes from one innovator, the screen from
> another innovator, the modem from yet another innovator, etc.
>
> What iPhone hardware innovation did Apple completely design without buying
> the underlying innovation from an actual hardware innovation company?

The A6 processor
The A7 processor

....

All the way to the A16 Bionic processor.

They license an Instruction Set Architechure.

Now run along and learn what that means before you continue in your
ignorance.

badgolferman wrote:

>> In this case, nospam's claim is nobody wants any smart phone that is half
>> the size in your pocket but double the screen size when you need it to be.
>>
>
> My 83 year-old stepfather wanted the Samsung folding phone so much he gave
> up the Apple 6+ which he had since it was new. I had to try and teach him
> how to use it and found it frustrating myself, mostly because I'm used to
> iOS and found Android to be unintuitive, but that's just my experience.

Hi badgolferman,

I speak to adults differently than I do to the ignorant iKooks whose only
goal in this thread is to defend Apple's lack of innovation to the death.

I was recently in a San Jose area T-Mobile store so I expressly sought out
a test on the folding phone as I waited for them to do a warranty swap for
the phone I received from them for free two April's ago when I took
advantage of T-Mobile's offer for a free 5G phone and half price iPhones
(where I'm well aware you not only took them up on the iPhone offer at that
time, but that you recently replaced that iPhone with a newer better one).

You know I own plenty of iOS and Android devices, and I help relatives out
just as you do, so I agree with your point that the older people in
particular have a terrible time switching platforms - simply because the
way everything is done is different on each platform.

For those of us who have both platforms, the switching is easy - but
Samsung's ad was targeting young people who are rather style conscious.
<https://9to5mac.com/2022/11/03/samsung-iphone-ad-foldables/>

While it's well known that Apple is a marketing outfit, not an innovator,
the one thing Apple is BRILLIANT at, is marketing to style conscious kids.

Those style-conscious kids are even unnaturally aware (nay, even ashamed)
of the color of their messaging bubbles - of all things - and yet that
messenging app is the one thing keeping young kids locked into the
ecosystem of the walled prison garden - so it's an important feature.

Hence I found Samsung's ad oddly appropriate, since it pointed out to the
very people who _believe_ in Apple's advertising that Apple can innovate.

Apple can't innovate.

What Apple is good at is _advertising_ that they can innovate.
At that, Apple is brilliant.

If you think Apple can innovate, then just name one functionality in the
latest iPhone of truly innovative quality that isn't already on Android.

>
> The phone folded in half, but it was also way too thick and bulky when put
> in a pocket. Personally I would not want it.

You have to admit a production folding phone is an innovative achievement.
If nothing else, you gain double the real estate for similar pocket space.

However, a folding phone does double the thickness (and weight) as noted.
Is there any other way to make a folding phone without doubling thickness?

BTW, like you, I have older relatives who need the additional screen size,
although it's pretty clear from Samsung's target market for that
advertisement that they're going after "style conscious" younger people.
<https://youtu.be/HeqD7v4f8Jk>

Another useful point since this is a wide audience, is that the iPhone is
almost completely crippled in what apps are allowed by Apple to be on the
App Store, where I was able to add NewPipe and Cellular-Z and the Aurora
Store to that T-Mobile store model without even using their Google account!

Since this is about privacy too, there is no privacy on an iPhone when you
must have a mothership tracking account just to be able to install apps.

But I do agree with you that the folding phone is twice as "fat" by nature.
And I agree that switching from either platform to the other causes some
people to be confused because the same things are done differently so.
--
Posted out of the goodness of my heart to disseminate useful information
which in this case is to respond to badgolferman's concerns like an adult.

On 2022-11-05, soyon <soyon@soyon.biz> wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Nov 2022 09:20:44 -0700, Alan wrote:
>
>>> It's classic for nospam to have only 7 excuses for why his beloved
>>> iPhone can't do the simplest of things that Android phones already
>>> easily do.
>>
>> You think Apple CAN'T make a folding phone the equal of what has been
>> released?
>
> On that note, blah blah blah

Arlen just can't stop creating new nyms. It's an addiction and
obsession! Poor, old fart just can't stop. : D

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

JR

On 2022-11-05, Bill W <nothing@nowhere.com> wrote:
> On Nov 05, 2022, nospam wrote (in article
><news:051120221350268624%nospam@nospam.invalid>):
>
>>> You think Apple CAN'T make a folding phone the equal of what has
>>> been released?
>>
>> of course they 'can', it's that they don't want to because the
>> folding phones that have been released so far (and many more that
>> haven't) aren't particularly good.
>
> Samsung's ad blah blah blah

Arlen with yet another nym. He just can't stop!

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

JR

Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
>
> But I do agree with you that the folding phone is twice as "fat" by nature.

Yes, that is true. Remember the Motorola Razr? I loved that phone because
it was stylish, thin, functional. I kept that phone long after it became
obsolete. I realize the Samsung flip phone isn’t the same thing but they
could have made it a bit longer and thinner. That way when folded it would
still be shorter than a standard smart phone and not so bulky when put in a
pocket.

> And I agree that switching from either platform to the other causes some
> people to be confused because the same things are done differently so.

One of those things that was difficult to negotiate was accessing and
finding voicemails. It seemed like you had to go to a different app than
the phone app to see them. It would have been nice to have a toolbar in the
phone app like iOS to see all phone related things.

badgolferman wrote:

>> But I do agree with you that the folding phone is twice as "fat" by nature.
>
> Yes, that is true.

Thank God!

A conversation with you is completely different than with the iKooks who
can't ever act civilly toward another person if Apple topics are involved.

What's different about adults like you (versus children like Jolly Roger &
nospam) is that you don't live to defend Apple to the death no matter what.

Also you don't defend Verizon to the death no matter what, like Steve does.
And, you have the ability to stay on topic (unlike the defensive iKooks).

Hence, a "normal" conversation results, instead of the endless lies and
fabrications from the iKooks defending what isn't possible to defend.

Over the years you've presented a balanced view of your 5G T-Mobile speeds
(as do I) and of your Apple iPhones (as do I with my iPhones and iPads).

> Remember the Motorola Razr?

You mean these innovative Motorola Razr flip phones? :)
<https://i.postimg.cc/gjmxgVPB/oldphone02.jpg>

Given I was in the corporate world when cellphones debuted, I had free
access to almost all the earlier "innovative" phones, with the exception of
the lunchbox sized analog phones reserved for the company president.
<https://i.postimg.cc/8k93fZNH/oldphone01.jpg>

BTW, speaking of people having trouble "switching" between the ecosystems,
how many innovative production cellphone ecosystems have we experienced?
1. Analog LED display with pullout antenna
2. Analog LCD display innovation (e.g., Razr)
3. Kyocera innovation
4. Blackberry innovation
5. Apple early iPhone innovation
6. Android coming into the market
etc.

> I loved that phone because it was stylish, thin, functional.

Yup. I have so many of those Motorola Razr updated phones that I can't even
find them all - and take a look at this Verizon flip phone BEFORE the Razr.
<https://i.postimg.cc/BbrHM9tJ/oldphone03.jpg>

Yes. That's a pullout antenna. Remember when the Razr was so innovative
that it didn't need an external pull out antenna?

I have old tablets too, both iOS and Android - none of which can update to
the latest security levels despite Apple's brazen lies to the contrary.

While I've had Apple, Motorola, Blackberry, Kyocera, Samsung & LG phones
over the years, my first smartphone was a Samsung Galaxy S3 which I loved.

> I kept that phone long after it became obsolete.

Speaking of innovation, I loved the Razr because it was innovatively small.

The phones that came after it (Kyocera and Blackberry) were innovative in
their own ways, but the Razr, as you noted, just felt small and good in use
in your hands.

That Razr fit in the pocket perfectly - much better than phablets do now.

> I realize the Samsung flip phone isn't the same thing but they
> could have made it a bit longer and thinner. That way when folded it would
> still be shorter than a standard smart phone and not so bulky when put in a
> pocket.

I agree with you (how could I not and still be reasonable) that the
innovation is both short and fat - not so short maybe - but very fat.

Too fat perhaps?
Maybe.

And, as nospam will invariably point out (even as he can't claim that Apple
could innovate any better) there is that feshugenah crease down the center.

BTW, here's another shot I took of the innovative Samsung folding phone in
the San Jose area T-Mobile store. The screen real estate is nice when
you're watching videos (e.g., I installed NewPipe & it worked beautifully).
<https://i.postimg.cc/3N6nhvqF/flipphone02.jpg>

The crease is palpable, but nospam's dubious hints that Apple is so
innovative that they can do better need to stand the test of evidence,
which, of course, nospam never supplies (he can't stop himself lying).

The point is that when you want a large phone, you have a large phone.
That screen size is clearly useful as can be seen in my debug photo.
<https://i.postimg.cc/Vk7QyrNd/flipphone01.jpg>

But I agree with you that you always have a fat phone - and it's very fat.
And I agree with nospam that there is always that palpable central crease.

>> And I agree that switching from either platform to the other causes some
>> people to be confused because the same things are done differently so.
>
> One of those things that was difficult to negotiate was accessing and
> finding voicemails. It seemed like you had to go to a different app than
> the phone app to see them. It would have been nice to have a toolbar in the
> phone app like iOS to see all phone related things.

Hmmmm.... I don't use default apps on a phone anymore but all the T-Mobile
Androids come with visual voicemail and other (supposedly) handy T-Mobile
tools (before I delete them).

Didn't your iPhone come with the T-Mobile visual voicemail app installed?

I just checked to see if it was there but one nice thing about Android is
you can delete almost all the default apps - and I already deleted it.
<https://i.postimg.cc/RZQKQYmz/tmobileapps.jpg>

The only remaining T-Mobile apps I couldn't delete were its "Device
Manager", "T-Mobile Diagnostics" and one just called "T-Mobile" (which you
can see from the screenshots above is disabled).

On the flip side to the ability of Android to delete default apps, it was a
bit too easy perhaps for me to install extremely non-Google apps such as
the FOSS replacements to YouTube, GMail, Chrome & the Google Play Store on
that T-mobile in-store demonstration phone. I did leave the phone open to
all those apps (particularly the YouTube FOSS replacement I tested to see
how fast the videos played and the wifi debugger to see cellular signal).

So if store personnel want to delete the apps I added, they easily can.

I generally delete/disable/force stop every app that comes with a phone,
and then I add only the apps that I want on my phone, which, unfortunately
for you, is far less possible for a huge number of reasons than for me.

BTW, keeping in mind the topic of this thread is the lack of innovation in
iPhones, I would LOVE if the new iPhone has some innovative features.

I, like you, would love to see both platforms prosper as competition
between Apple and the Android makers just means better things for us.

Given you have the new iPhone, is there anything on that iPhone that you
would consider to be innovative that isn't already designed into Android?
--
Posted out of the goodness of my heart to disseminate useful information
which in this case is to agree with badgolferman on almost all accounts.

Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
>
> Given you have the new iPhone, is there anything on that iPhone that you
> would consider to be innovative that isn't already designed into Android?

Honestly there’s really not much difference between the 12 and 14 that I
can see. However the new phone had to have iOS 16 which has some features I
absolutely hate, like how to change the wallpaper. In an effort to make
more custom wallpapers available they’ve made the whole process too
complicated and unintuitive. Maybe this was an attempt to copy Android but
I don’t really know for sure.

badgolferman wrote:

>> Given you have the new iPhone, is there anything on that iPhone that you
>> would consider to be innovative that isn't already designed into Android?
>
> Honestly there�s really not much difference between the 12 and 14 that I
> can see. However the new phone had to have iOS 16 which has some features I
> absolutely hate, like how to change the wallpaper. In an effort to make
> more custom wallpapers available they�ve made the whole process too
> complicated and unintuitive. Maybe this was an attempt to copy Android but
> I don�t really know for sure.

Hi badgolferman,

Thanks for hazarding an answer to what on the latest phones (Android or
iOS) is truly innovative that one platform has but the other does not.

Your daily driver is a 5G iPhone while mine is a 5G Android.
For most things, they both do what the other does, as far as I can tell.

On the topic of innovation... I doubt either platform is innovative today.
However...

I have to give Apple full credit for the innovation of the iPod & iPhone,
where I had the earlier Panasonic MP3 players and the Verizon flip phone.

The Apple innovations were fantastically prescient in almost all ways.

The Apple iPod simplicity was vastly innovative over the multibutton
Panasonic MP3 players which required the user manual just to operate.

About the only thing I hated about the early iPods was the requirement for
Apple bloatware, which, over time, I learned to work around with SharePod.

Then Apple came up with the hugely innovative iPhone, which shook the
smartphone world to the point that virtually every phone today is a copy.

At that time, the main thing I didn't like about the iPhone was the lack of
working on T-Mobile, so I had to jailbreak and use Cydia for apps instead.

Again, it "required" the iTunes abomination which was my main introduction
to the walled garden making things unnecessarily complicated to lock us in.

Notice the dichotomy?
a. Apple innovated in both the iPod & iPhone in a fantastic way...
b. Such that the user interface was FANTASTICALLY simple & intuitive!
b. But Apple then cemented the user into the walled garden for profit.

Nothing has changed on the Apple side but what's changed is Android.
The first Android's were horrid copies of the iPhone (if even that).

But they improved steadily over time.

The big problems with Android's ecosystem, at first, were the lack of
uniformity and the inability to update phones due to that diversity.

But Android has long ago overcome those problems such that they're quite
uniform now and of course the user interface is super powerful nowadays.

Even the updates have long ago surpassed that of Apple, even as the iKooks
don't understand that their monolithic operating system is highly flawed.

At this point, as long as being locked into a walled garden with updates
that aren't as long lasting as Apple claims they are (Apple recently got
caught lying again), both ecosystems are roughly about the same in terms of
security update longevity (with Android taking on a slight lead lately).

The one difference (in addition to being locked into the walled garden of
course), is that Android functionality far exceeds that of iOS apps but, to
the point of many who use a phone to play games and make phone calls, much
of the functionality I use on Android wouldn't be undertood by most iOS
users (and even by most Android users who, like nospam, Jolly Roger & Snit,
wouldn't know a decibel from a megabitpersecond).

As long as the graph is pretty - they "think" it's the same thing. :)

Moving on, it's nice to discuss the "innovation" of Apple vs Android,
where, at this point, I think most smartphones are a mature product.

Hence, innovation will be more loudly heard (in ads) than actually seen.

On 2022-11-05 15:45, Andy Burnelli wrote:
> badgolferman wrote:
>
>>> Given you have the new iPhone, is there anything on that iPhone that you
>>> would consider to be innovative that isn't already designed into
>>> Android?
>>
>> Honestly there�s really not much difference between the 12 and 14 that I
>> can see. However the new phone had to have iOS 16 which has some
>> features I
>> absolutely hate, like how to change the wallpaper. In an effort to make
>> more custom wallpapers available they�ve made the whole process too
>> complicated and unintuitive. Maybe this was an attempt to copy Android
>> but
>> I don�t really know for sure.
>
> Hi badgolferman,
>
> Thanks for hazarding an answer to what on the latest phones (Android or
> iOS) is truly innovative that one platform has but the other does not.
>
> Your daily driver is a 5G iPhone while mine is a 5G Android.
> For most things, they both do what the other does, as far as I can tell.
>
> On the topic of innovation... I doubt either platform is innovative today.
> However...
> I have to give Apple full credit for the innovation of the iPod & iPhone,
> where I had the earlier Panasonic MP3 players and the Verizon flip phone.
>
> The Apple innovations were fantastically prescient in almost all ways.
>
> The Apple iPod simplicity was vastly innovative over the multibutton
> Panasonic MP3 players which required the user manual just to operate.
>
> About the only thing I hated about the early iPods was the requirement for
> Apple bloatware, which, over time, I learned to work around with SharePod.
>
> Then Apple came up with the hugely innovative iPhone, which shook the
> smartphone world to the point that virtually every phone today is a copy.
>
> At that time, the main thing I didn't like about the iPhone was the lack of
> working on T-Mobile, so I had to jailbreak and use Cydia for apps instead.
>
> Again, it "required" the iTunes abomination which was my main introduction
> to the walled garden making things unnecessarily complicated to lock us in.
>
> Notice the dichotomy?
> a. Apple innovated in both the iPod & iPhone in a fantastic way...
> b. Such that the user interface was FANTASTICALLY simple & intuitive!
> b. But Apple then cemented the user into the walled garden for profit.

And people liked the product so much that they were more than willing.

In fact, for many the "walled garden" is a part of the appeal.

>
> Nothing has changed on the Apple side but what's changed is Android.
> The first Android's were horrid copies of the iPhone (if even that).

And still are.

>
> But they improved steadily over time.
>
> The big problems with Android's ecosystem, at first, were the lack of
> uniformity and the inability to update phones due to that diversity.

And it still is.

>
> But Android has long ago overcome those problems such that they're quite
> uniform now and of course the user interface is super powerful nowadays.

<Cough>Bullshit!<cough>

>
> Even the updates have long ago surpassed that of Apple, even as the iKooks
> don't understand that their monolithic operating system is highly flawed.

It isn't monolithic.

>
> At this point, as long as being locked into a walled garden with updates
> that aren't as long lasting as Apple claims they are (Apple recently got
> caught lying again), both ecosystems are roughly about the same in terms of
> security update longevity (with Android taking on a slight lead lately).

Apple's updates are far more long-lasting that Android's typical updates.

>
> The one difference (in addition to being locked into the walled garden of
> course), is that Android functionality far exceeds that of iOS apps but, to

More bullshit.

> the point of many who use a phone to play games and make phone calls, much
> of the functionality I use on Android wouldn't be undertood by most iOS
> users (and even by most Android users who, like nospam, Jolly Roger & Snit,
> wouldn't know a decibel from a megabitpersecond).
> As long as the graph is pretty - they "think" it's the same thing. :)
>
> Moving on, it's nice to discuss the "innovation" of Apple vs Android,
> where, at this point, I think most smartphones are a mature product.
>
> Hence, innovation will be more loudly heard (in ads) than actually seen.

On 06.11.2022 03:30, Alan wrote:

> Apple's updates are far more long-lasting that Android's typical updates.

Bullshit. That hasn't been the case for years. Get with the times.

Apple iOS has only the one big update of everything in each release.
Android breaks the system into smaller pieces each updated separately.

Do you even know how Android updates?

Write what you "think" is how Google updates the Android kernel today, the
apps, the security and the core modules (each of which is done different).

Compare that to how Apple does the same task.
Apple's updates are NOT "more long lasting" and it's not even close today.

The _only_ iOS devices which get full security updates are on iOS 16 today
while Android full security updates for Samsung and Pixel phones is longer.

The _only_ iOS devices which get the full core module updates are those on
iOS 15 & 16 today while Android full core modules updates are years longer.

Do you even know how iOS updates?

On 2022-11-05 21:47, wolfgang kern wrote:
> On 06.11.2022 03:30, Alan wrote:
>
>> Apple's updates are far more long-lasting that Android's typical updates.
>
> Bullshit. That hasn't been the case for years. Get with the times.
>
> Apple iOS has only the one big update of everything in each release.
> Android breaks the system into smaller pieces each updated separately.

Arlen.

Have the balls to post under your own name, huh?

On 05.11.2022 23:41, Alan wrote:

> Have the balls to post under your own name, huh?

Speaking of your balls, instead of cowardly changing the subject why don't
you have the balls to explain how iOS and Android updates greatly differ.

Since you're clueless, you can even google it first & post what you learn.

On 2022-11-05 21:47, wolfgang kern wrote:
> On 06.11.2022 03:30, Alan wrote:
>>
>> Apple's updates are far more long-lasting that Android's typical updates.
>
> Bullshit. That hasn't been the case for years. Get with the times.
>
> Apple iOS has only the one big update of everything in each release.
> Android breaks the system into smaller pieces each updated separately.

As always, the moronic anti-Apple know-nothing trolls simply prove how
completely and utter ignorant they are. :-\

iOS 15 has had *15* updates (not counting the Beta releases) since 15.0
was officially released in September 2021.
<https://www.gkgigs.com/list-apple-ios-version-history/#iOS_15>

That's just the OS itself. The various apps people have installed would
have had their own separate updates as well.

On 06.11.2022 07:36, Your Name wrote:

> iOS 15 has had *15* updates (not counting the Beta releases) since 15.0
> was officially released in September 2021.
> <https://www.gkgigs.com/list-apple-ios-version-history/#iOS_15>

Funny you mention iOS 15 which you don't realize Apple already declared
dead which shows how little you know about iOS updates versus upgrades.

Only devices running iOS 16 get the full set of iOS security updates.

Apple clarifies security update policy:
Only the latest OSes are fully patched despite Apple's previous lies.
New document confirms what security researchers have known for years.
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2022/10/apple-clarifies-security-update-policy-only-the-latest-oses-are-fully-patched/

Apple finally was forced to admit that only iOS devices running the most
recent major operating system (in this case, iOS 16 only!) should ever
expect to be fully protected from security threats.

Since Apple says iOS 16 is currently the ONLY iOS users should expect to be
fully patched, how far back can iOS devices support iOS 16 today?

On 2022-11-05 23:08, wolfgang kern wrote:
> On 05.11.2022 23:41, Alan wrote:
>
>> Have the balls to post under your own name, huh?
>
> Speaking of your balls, instead of cowardly changing the subject why don't
> you have the balls to explain how iOS and Android updates greatly differ.
>
> Since you're clueless, you can even google it first & post what you learn.

So you basically admit this is just the latest in a long line of posting
nyms.

Got it.