In article <tcm27b$uno$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:

> *The result is there is no operating system with a _shorter life_ - than iOS.*

windows phone says hello.

microsoft kin says howzit.

beos says bonjour.

palm os says aloha.

amiga os says hola.

nospam wrote:

>> Remember... I'm on this newsgroup for _two_ reasons:
>
> trolling and lying.

You iKooks can't form an _adult_ response to facts about Apple products.

The facts are:
a. iOS is a monolith while _all_ other common consumer OS's are layered
b. The primitive iOS monolith contains _all_ the layers in one release
c. All modern operating systems break the release into their layers

With iOS, it's all or nothing - and - worse - iOS dies soonest of all.

HINT: My circa 2008 desktop is _still_ running a free update of the
original Windows that it came with an decade and a half ago.

HINT: Android is layered into scores upon scores of layers, each of
which is independently released to the users over the Internet.

HINT: *iOS just dies*

nospam wrote:

>> Meanwhile, a PC from circa 2005 runs Windows 10 just fine,
>
> no it doesn't

FACTS

I just snapped this screenshot for you nospam, where the PC I was
sitting at (which isn't my oldest PC running Windows 10) is from 2009.
<https://i.postimg.cc/3x3pZBfP/version01.jpg> Windows & Android updates

Why is it that you iKooks must resort to denying facts, like flat earth
proponents, just to maintain intact your completely imaginary beliefs?

Why must iKooks declare all facts are wrong - just because they hate facts?

Your beloved iOS operating system *just dies* on you so you "think" all
operating systems are built as a laughably primitive stone-age monolith.

My desktop is almost fifteen years old, nospam, and it was born with a
Windows version which has been constantly updated, for free, ever since.

Just like my modern Android phone, Windows updates in asynchronous layers.
But due to the primitive iOS archaic monolith - *iOS just dies* on users.

nospam wrote:

>> *The result is there is no operating system with a _shorter life_ - than iOS.*
>
> windows phone says hello.
>
> microsoft kin says howzit.
>
> beos says bonjour.
>
> palm os says aloha.
>
> amiga os says hola.

Note the best comparison you can find to iOS, are dead operating systems.

I never disagree with facts nospam, and I appreciate that your facts proved
my point in that I said all _common_ consumer operating systems many times.

What you found out were facts that _many_ nascent operating systems died.
And that's true. (Only a fool would dispute facts.)
(That's why they're fools.)

What you need to understand is I'm talking about _common_ consumer
operating systems, such as Linux, Android, & Windows compared to iOS.
<https://i.postimg.cc/W39XTWWZ/version01.jpg> Windows & Android updates

Those common consumer operating systems essentially are updated almost
forever which, in the case of Windows, for me, is my 2009 desktop is
still running Windows 10 with the constant free upgrades from Microsoft.

In addition, _all_ the apps run just fine as they are updated
asynchronously, which is important because with iOS - it all just dies.

Note the best comparison you can find to iOS, are dead operating systems.

Jolly Roger wrote:

>> What is the oldest Android phone supported by the most current version
>> of Android, hmmm?
>
> One example: The HTC Dream was released in 2008

If the _best_ you can do to compare the iPhone to is the "HTC Dream",
then that shows how _desperate_ iKooks are to defend the demise of iOS.

*The fact remains Android is updated in _layers_ (while iOS is not).*

That means the default Android *web browser* is updated essentially forever.
That means the default Android *messenger* isupdated essentially forever.
That means the default Android *mail client* is updated essentially forever.
That means the default Android *calendar* is updated essentially forever.
That means the default Android *file mgr* is updated essentially forever.
That means the default Android *map app* is updated essentially forever.
That means the default Android *gallery* is updated essentially forever.
That means the default Android *camera app* is updated essentially forever.
That means the default Android *av player* is updated essentially forever.
That means the default Android *app store* is updated essentially forever.
That means the default Android *contact mgr* is updated essentially forever.
etc.

In addition, over two dozen core components of the underlying operating
system are updated now essentially forever asynchronously over the net.

By way of stark contrast, iOS just dies on you.
*All of it*

Gone.
*poof*

Wade Garrett wrote:

> Andie-boy, you remind me of a guy who hates his hometown team but can't
> stay away from the ballpark where he regularly shows up to boo them and
> yell invectives...

Hi Wade,

Why can't you respond to the _facts_ instead of playing childish games?

The facts are that only Apple operating systems die on you such that you
can no longer update the default apps to the latest version on iOS.

That's just a fact.
It's a fact you _hate_ perhaps.

But the fact you hate that fact doesn't change the fact that fact is a fact.

*No other common consumer operating system _just dies_ like iOS does*
The adult question is why.

Are you an adult Wade?
Or a child?

Do you have an adult point of view Wade?
Or only that of a child?

Given you the benefit of the doubt, here's an adult question for you Wade:
*Why can't an older iOS update the default apps to the latest version*
*like all other common consumer operating systems habitually do?*
--
Please answer this adult question... like an adult would.

sms wrote:

> On my older flagship Android devices there are no upgrades to the latest
> Android version, but they are still receiving security updates. My Note
> 9 shipped with Android 8 and received two updates and is now at Android
> 10, and won't get Android 11 or future new Android versions. But it gets
> security updates, the most recent one was pushed out in June 2022, so
> the device is still supported.

What most people, including Steve, on this newsgroup don't seem to
comprehend is that a phone includes lots more than simply a meaningless
version number.

For example, a phone contains default apps, such as the default web
browser, the default messenger app, the default mail user agent, the
default navigation app, the default calendar app, the default file manager
app, etc., all of which are updated on Android well after the meaningless
operating system version has expired.

In addition, a phone contains layers of core functionalities and services,
again which are updated nowadays (after about Android 10) essentially
forever, where those updates are completely independent of the carrier and
the manufacturer of the phone.

In addition to those critical operating system components outside the
meaningless version number, there are the security patches, which do
require (most of the time) the manufacturer to be involved.

Lastly, and definitely the least important, is the almost meaningless
Android version, which, let's be clear, provides almost zero value to the
user since almost everything (but not always everything!) that any one
version adds, the older versions can back port.

Having said that, _none_ of this is possible on iOS, so Steve is correct in
saying that comparing the operating system update mechanism between Android
and iOS requires a knowledge level that I don't think many people here
have.

Certainly not the iKooks, and it seems, from what Steve wrote, not him.

Jolly Roger wrote:

> The only people comparing them are you and your troll buddies. The rest
> of us couldn't care less because we don't have unhealthy obsessions and
> irrational hatred of other operating systems or platform.

Actually you do care, Jolly Roger.
You care a lot.

You _hate_ that iOS uses a laughably primitive archaic update mechanism.

With every common consumer OS other than iOS, when the almost meaningless
operating system version number expires, nothing changes becuase the
devices maintains almost full functionality in terms of updates.

yet...

on iOS...

Unfortunately for you, Jolly Roger...

On iOS... Everything *just dies*.

nospam wrote:

> very few features appear on android first. the vast majority of
> features appear on ios first and later on android, if ever.

How long did it take for iOS to include even a rudimentary app drawer?
What about default app selection nospam?
And, um, er., when is IOS gonna get the ability to change the launcher?

The list is almost endless what Android has and what iOS can't do,
but the list of what Android did first and iOS could barely catch up is
shorter.

In article <tcnpn0$gfi$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:

>
> > very few features appear on android first. the vast majority of
> > features appear on ios first and later on android, if ever.
>
> How long did it take for iOS to include even a rudimentary app drawer?
> What about default app selection nospam?
> And, um, er., when is IOS gonna get the ability to change the launcher?

almost nobody cares about any of those.

meanwhile, you snipped the lengthy list of things ios had first, and
that list isn't even complete.

here it is again:
retina displays, wide gamut displays, 64 bit processors, bluetooth le,
face id, 3d touch, secure enclave, colorsync, truetone, arkit,
airprint, homekit, healthkit, uwb, airdrop, magsafe, live photos,
private relay, universal control, object capture, shortcuts, continuity
& handoff, matter & thread, promotion, heif/hevc, app tracking
transparency, sign-in with apple, javascript in hardware, animoji,
passkey, apple pay later, tap to pay payments, continuity camera,
facetime handoff, cinematic mode, share extensions, instant hotspot,
bluetooth pair sync, lockscreen widgets, lidar and roomplan.

i realize that you haven't any clue what most of those are, but that
doesn't negate the fact that ios is almost always first with new stuff.

> The list is almost endless what Android has and what iOS can't do,

nope. it's the other way around, which is why you snipped the list.

very few things appear on android first. very few.

On 8/7/22 3:16 AM, Andy Burnelli wrote:
> Wade Garrett wrote:
>
>> Andie-boy, you remind me of a guy who hates his hometown team but
>> can't stay away from the ballpark where he regularly shows up to boo
>> them and yell invectives...
>
> Hi Wade,
>
> Why can't you respond to the _facts_ instead of playing childish games?
>
> The facts are that only Apple operating systems die on you such that you
> can no longer update the default apps to the latest version on iOS.
>
> That's just a fact.
> It's a fact you _hate_ perhaps.
>
> But the fact you hate that fact doesn't change the fact that fact is a
> fact.
>
> *No other common consumer operating system _just dies_ like iOS does*
> The adult question is why.
>
> Are you an adult Wade?
> Or a child?
>
> Do you have an adult point of view Wade?
> Or only that of a child?
>
> Given you the benefit of the doubt, here's an adult question for you Wade:
> *Why can't an older iOS update the default apps to the latest version*
> *like all other common consumer operating systems habitually do?*

Sure thing guy...you've reaffirmed my point. Give it a rest ;-)

nospam wrote:

>> How long did it take for iOS to include even a rudimentary app drawer?
>> What about default app selection nospam?
>> And, um, er., when is IOS gonna get the ability to change the launcher?
>
> almost nobody cares about any of those.

This is an ADULT CONVERSATION which most iKooks won't be able to fathom...

My point is that I agree that Apple innovated a _lot_ of smartphone
niceties that the Android market duly copied to provide to Android users.

However, I'm not like you who only takes Apple's propaganda or like Steve
who only shills for Verizon. I don't care if Apple comes up with a better
tool than Android as long as Android can copy that tool (which the market
will do for the Android users if it's a useful thing & not just a gimmick).

On the other hand, a _lot_ of functionality was pioneered by Android, which
is why I mentioned the app drawer, which, if you claim "nobody cares" then
that's another reason why I know you have a low IQ because people do care.

But for you to claim that "nobody cares" about setting app defaults is to
simply prove you don't own the adult cognitive skills to recognize they do
care. They care very much. Which is why Apple finally relented and copied
Android's lead (albeit not very inclusively) in allow app default settings.

> meanwhile, you snipped the lengthy list of things ios had first, and
> that list isn't even complete.

Look nospam, i.f you're going to have a conversation here, act like an adult.
Again, I'm going to speak to you as if you own adult comprehensive skills.

Nobody who is an adult disputes the fact that Apple came up with a _lot_ of
nice features for the mobile phone audience that the Android market copied.

Certainly I won't dispute that fact because only a fool disputes facts.

A classic example of what Steve Jobs came up with is the fundamental
interface we all use that Android copied and then allowed to be improved
myriad ways (with the result that there are myriad launchers out there).

Another example given Apple (admittedly falsely) markets itself as "privacy
conscious" of where Android shamelessly copied Apple was in the privacy
controls and in the privacy indicators that Android recently added.

Most of the examples you gave are bullshit (or more accurately, trademarked
marketed silly gimmicks); but some of the examples you provided were fair.

Some were dead wrong (e.g., Apple Pay), but we've discussed this ad
infinitum, so I didn't go down that rathole with you as you don't own the
mental capacity to understand the history of electronic payment systems
(nor do I care about them myself anyway so it wouldn't be worth my while).

What you did is what you low-IQ no-education iKooks _always_ do, which was
you brainlessly cut and pasted off the Internet a bullshit list (e.g.,
"sign-in with apple"... WTF?) that had no meaning whatsoever, even to you.

You actually think if we see a long list of trademark bullshit that we'll
be duly "impressed" at all the great bullshit gimmicks Apple decided to
name spending more researching the name than R&D creating the product.

In that long list of bullshit, you add silly childish things (e.g.,
"animoji") that show you have no concept of the difference between a mere
marketing gimmick for kids versus actual functionalities for adults.

> many times, if they do appear on android, the implementation is not as
> good, notably bluetooth le, which took several *years* until android
> bluetooth le caught up to where apple had been.

This is an ADULT conversation...

While this belated copying of Apple by the Android market may be true in
some cases that Android's copy of Apple features isn't "as good" as the
actual Apple feature (e.g., "RCS"), the opposite is also true (e.g., Apple
copying of app drawers" and "app defaults" is vastly substandard to
Android's many implementations).

Suffice to say the market dynamics determine the functionality.
That's just a fact.

Unfortunately, in overall summary, the creative market for Android is vast
compared to the creative market for iOS in that Apple _restricts_ what the
market can supply.

Apple severely cripples that supply market in fundamental ways:
1. Apple vastly restricts the APIs available to the app developers
(e.g., it's impossible to get a torrent app on the app store)
2. Apple vastly restricts some functionality to only Apple solutions
(e.g., the default messenger app must be the Apple messenger app)
1. Apple restricts technology innovation (e.g., webkit requirements)
(e.g., the Tor Browser functionality is impossible on iOS)

In summary, I realize this conversation contained far too many adult
concepts for you to comprehend - but the point is that Apple products will
_always_ have _lesser_ functionality than open market products simply
because it's the MARKET who provides the functionality and yet, Apple
vastly restricts what that open market is able to provide.

They don't call it the walled garden for no reason.
It's far more like a walled institutional prison cell if you ask me.

Yet you iKooks _love_ being restricted and that's just fine.
Just stop saying that it's not what it is, that's all I ask of you.

Wade Garrett wrote:

> Sure thing guy...you've reaffirmed my point. Give it a rest ;-)

Notice the fact you can't respond to a fact like an adult should.
You _hate_ that the primitive iOS monolith lacks support longevity.
*iOS just die*

That's just a fact.
Your belief system, however, isn't based on any actual facts.

Your entire belief system is based purely on bullshit Apple marketing.

Much like flat earthers are wont to do, in order to maintain your
completely imaginary belief system, you respond with childish retorts.

Yet the fact remains a fact when you understand what operating systems are.
a. All modern operating common consumer operating systems update in layers.
b. Except the laughably primitive stone-age iOS monolith.

*That fact alone is why _iOS support dies sooner_ than all the others do*

Jolly Roger wrote:

> The level of unhappiness and hatred to cause this behavior must truly be
> hellish. And he does this to himself *willingly*. His existence is just
> pathetic.

And yet none of you iKooks has any adult response to the facts I presented.

*No other modern operating system dies sooner than does iOS.*
That's just a fact.

The fact is due to the primitive stone-age monolithic iOS design...
*iOS just dies*

You _hate_ that fact.
But the fact you hate facts doesn't change the fact it's still a fact.

In article <tcp1r8$1h1j$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:

> Nobody who is an adult disputes the fact that Apple came up with a _lot_ of
> nice features for the mobile phone audience that the Android market copied.

except for you and the other resident troll, which means by your own
metric, you are both children.

> Certainly I won't dispute that fact because only a fool disputes facts.

then by your own metric, you are also a fool.

> Most of the examples you gave are bullshit (or more accurately, trademarked
> marketed silly gimmicks); but some of the examples you provided were fair.

all of them were fair.

> Some were dead wrong (e.g., Apple Pay),

apple pay was not mentioned, however, i'm glad you mentioned that,
because apple pay did predate google pay (previously android pay) by a
few years. thanks for mentioning something that i forgot to include.

what was mentioned was apply pay later, a new feature that's *part* of
apple pay and not currently available with google pay. it lets people
split a larger purchase into four interest-free payments over a six
week period, thus the name 'later'.

another feature in the list is tap to pay, which lets the iphone owner
*accept* contactless payments from others, and not just from other
iphones using apple pay, but also from android phones via google pay or
just tapping a contactless card. that means that just about anyone can
now accept credit/debit card payments, even a kid mowing lawns.

>
> What you did is what you low-IQ no-education iKooks _always_ do, which was
> you brainlessly cut and pasted off the Internet a bullshit list (e.g.,
> "sign-in with apple"... WTF?) that had no meaning whatsoever, even to you.

sign-in with apple is a way to sign in to web sites without the web
site knowing anything about you, since all they get is a unique and
cryptic apple email that forwards to your actual email, which is kept
hidden from said web site, something that a paranoid individual like
you would want.

it's a feature android does not have. it's that simple.

> You actually think if we see a long list of trademark bullshit that we'll
> be duly "impressed" at all the great bullshit gimmicks Apple decided to
> name spending more researching the name than R&D creating the product.

almost none of what was listed is trademarked, and that's irrelevant
anyway.

nospam wrote:

>> Nobody who is an adult disputes the fact that Apple came up with a _lot_ of
>> nice features for the mobile phone audience that the Android market copied.
>
> except for you and the other resident troll, which means by your own
> metric, you are both children.

Only a fool disputes facts.

I never dispute facts, nospam, except then they aren't facts, e.g., when
Steve incessantly shilled for Verizon using calculated FCC coverage maps
based on what the carriers provide and which didn't show _any_ 5G signal.

Steve claimed those maps showed what they did not show.
So I (successfully & correctly) disputed what Steve "claimed" was a fact.

Either Steve knew that fact, or Steve didn't know that fact.
Either say, it showed Steve lacked adult comprehensive skills.

Rest assured, I do not lack basic adult comprehensive skills, nospam.
Which means that I see right through almost every 'fact' you claim.

>> Certainly I won't dispute that fact because only a fool disputes facts.
>
> then by your own metric, you are also a fool.

In this thread nospam, it's _you_ who trolled the thread by claiming
imaginary functionality for iOS that either you knew does NOT exist, or,
that you "think" exists, either way it shows lack of adult comprehensive
skills.

The fact is Steve was _correct_ when he said iOS can't do the mock location
the way Android does it - using the phone and the phone alone.

Given you disputed that fact without providing a single credible fact to
back up your (fabricated) claims, it's _you_ who is trolling this group.

>
>> Most of the examples you gave are bullshit (or more accurately, trademarked
>> marketed silly gimmicks); but some of the examples you provided were fair.
>
> all of them were fair.

You always play this game nospam.
You think everyone owns the same lack of adult comprehensive skills as you.

Stop it.

You found on the net some bullshit marketing list of bullshit from Apple
and you cut and pasted that bullshit list thinking it would "impress" us.

Wow. Oh wow. Oh my gawd! Apple can create marketing trademarks. Gee! Wow.
Apple trademarks things _decades_ after others pioneered them, nospam.

The fact Apple likely spends far more in trademark research than actual R&D
of the products is an indicator that Apple also feels its users are stupid.

But I'm not stupid nospam.
You are stupid if you think I am.

Stop it with the bullshit cut and paste of meaningless bullshit assuming
I'll be duly impressed with a list of bullshit Apple trademarks. I'm not.

Pick _one_ important item that I'd care about which you think Apple
pioneered that the _current_ Android didn't copy as well as the _current_
Apple implementation, and I'll check it out.

But stop it with the bullshit pasting of a list of bullshit trademarks that
even you don't know what they all stand for (since most are bullshit).

>> Some were dead wrong (e.g., Apple Pay),
>
> apple pay was not mentioned,
> however, i'm glad you mentioned that,
> because apple pay did predate google pay (previously android pay) by a
> few years. thanks for mentioning something that i forgot to include.

Bullshit. Android had electronic payment well before Apple did, but I
really don't care as we've been down that rathole many times and you don't
seem to own any adult comprehensive skills to even remember that fact.

Just name _one_ important item that I'd care about that you think Apple
pioneered that either Android does NOT have or that you think the Android
implementation is substandard.

The reason I have to care is that I'm not going to waste my time on your
silly claims that Apple emoji matter because that's a bullshit item.

> what was mentioned was apply pay later, a new feature that's *part* of
> apple pay and not currently available with google pay. it lets people
> split a larger purchase into four interest-free payments over a six
> week period, thus the name 'later'.

Android has electronic payment. Apple has electronic payment.
Android is better in some ways. Apple is better in some ways.

The fact is both have electronic payment so for your entire argument to be
based on that means you have no argument, nospam.

Stop basing your entire argument on bullshit.
That works on dumbshits like the rest of you iKooks.

But it doesn't work on intelligent people.

Name one important functionality that you feel I would care about (because
I'm not wasting my time on the stone-age dysfunctional webkit for example),
that you feel iOS has that Android does not, and I'll take a look at it.

Can you do something like that?
It's what an _adult_ would do.

> another feature in the list is tap to pay, which lets the iphone owner
> *accept* contactless payments from others, and not just from other
> iphones using apple pay, but also from android phones via google pay or
> just tapping a contactless card. that means that just about anyone can
> now accept credit/debit card payments, even a kid mowing lawns.

Again, your entire argument is based on Apple's marketing bullshit.
Stop it.

*Base your argument on facts like an adult should.*

Name a single app functionality that you claim is on iOS that you claim is
not on Android that I will care about (since I'm not wasting my time on
privacy destroying marketing gimmicks like the ones you seem to favor).

Name just one.

>> What you did is what you low-IQ no-education iKooks _always_ do, which was
>> you brainlessly cut and pasted off the Internet a bullshit list (e.g.,
>> "sign-in with apple"... WTF?) that had no meaning whatsoever, even to you.
>
> sign-in with apple is a way to sign in to web sites without the web
> site knowing anything about you, since all they get is a unique and
> cryptic apple email that forwards to your actual email, which is kept
> hidden from said web site, something that a paranoid individual like
> you would want.
>
> it's a feature android does not have. it's that simple.

If you think that I care about that bullshit Apple marketing gimmick, you
don't own adult comprehensive skills nospam. First off, if it requires 2FA,
you don't seem to own the adult comprehensive skills to know that Apple
refuses to allow you to _ever_ turn 2FA off once you set it up (after the
short grace period expires).

Interestingly the judge threw out the court case against Apple for that
because of the "caveat emptor" tenet of law which says, essentially, if
you're so stupid that you click on the Apple "OK" button to agree to those
Draconian terms, then the law isn't going to protect you from your own
stupidity.

Pick something that isn't something only fools do, nospam.

>> You actually think if we see a long list of trademark bullshit that we'll
>> be duly "impressed" at all the great bullshit gimmicks Apple decided to
>> name spending more researching the name than R&D creating the product.
>
> almost none of what was listed is trademarked,

Apple is the master of marketing gimmicks, nospam.
I understand that stupid people fall for those marketing gimmicks.

But let's keep this conversation at the adult level.
So cut out the stupid marketing tricks, willya'.

> and that's irrelevant anyway.

First off, that's wrong, but I don't care as I want to move forward on your
claim that there is even one useful iOS app functionality that I'd care
about (because I don't care about fancy childish bullshit like animoji
gimmicks) that Apple has on the iPhone that isn't on Android.

Certainly there is plenty of useful Android app functionality (such as what
Steve wrote about in the mock GPS location thread) which isn't on iOS...

But is there _anything_ on iOS that's useful to me that isn't on Android?

Maybe. Maybe not.
You claim there is.

OK.
*Name just one.*
--
HINT: It's what an adult would do.

> On 8/7/22 3:16 AM, Andy Burnelli wrote:
>> Wade Garrett wrote:
>>>
>>> Andie-boy, you remind me of a guy who hates his hometown team but can't
>>> stay away from the ballpark where he regularly shows up to boo them and
>>> yell invectives...
>>
>> Hi Wade,
>>
>> Why can't you respond to the _facts_ instead of playing childish games?
>>
>> The facts are that only Apple operating systems die on you such that you
>> can no longer update the default apps to the latest version on iOS.
<snip>

As usual, the moronic troll, having been proven wrong, now changes his
fictional nonsense to yet more brainless crap.

Try running the latest version of Microsoft's Edge web browser on
Windows 3.0 computer. Try running the latest version of whatever crappy
Android web browser on an Android 1.0 mobile device.

In article <tcpbd9$1445$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Your Name
<YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:

> Try running the latest version of Microsoft's Edge web browser on
> Windows 3.0 computer.

no need to go back that far. it doesn't work on early win10 versions.

In article <tcp9v1$l2b$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:

> Only a fool disputes facts.

why do you keep calling yourself a fool?

> But I'm not stupid nospam.

the evidence shows otherwise.

>
> >> Some were dead wrong (e.g., Apple Pay),
> >
> > apple pay was not mentioned,
> > however, i'm glad you mentioned that,
> > because apple pay did predate google pay (previously android pay) by a
> > few years. thanks for mentioning something that i forgot to include.
>
> Bullshit. Android had electronic payment well before Apple did,

except what google had required merchants to have a custom reader,
which almost none did, plus all payments went through google using a
single registered card, which mean google tracked everything you bought
and purchases showed up as from google and not the actual store. that
meant it's both hard to track things on your statement and credit cards
didn't see the categories, so the user loses out on any rewards. not
only was it very rare, but it didn't work well.

apple pay is built upon industry standard emv instead of a proprietary
system, which means the user can use it *anywhere* contactless cards
are accepted, using any or all of their existing cards. purchases show
up on the credit card statement as they normally would and apple has no
idea what anyone bought.

google immediately started working on android pay, which was released
about two years later, later renamed to google pay.

> Android has electronic payment. Apple has electronic payment.
> Android is better in some ways. Apple is better in some ways.

goalpost movement.

>
> > another feature in the list is tap to pay, which lets the iphone owner
> > *accept* contactless payments from others, and not just from other
> > iphones using apple pay, but also from android phones via google pay or
> > just tapping a contactless card. that means that just about anyone can
> > now accept credit/debit card payments, even a kid mowing lawns.
>
> Again, your entire argument is based on Apple's marketing bullshit.

it's not marketing bullshit. tap to pay is an extremely useful feature,
one that you clearly don't understand.

> First off, if it requires 2FA,
> you don't seem to own the adult comprehensive skills to know that Apple
> refuses to allow you to _ever_ turn 2FA off once you set it up (after the
> short grace period expires).

good thing google doesn't do that.

oh wait...

<https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/11/google-wants-every-account-to-u
se-2fa-starts-auto-enrolling-users/>
Google announced earlier this year that it is planning to forcefully
transition as many of its users as possible to two-factor
authentication (2FA). The company elaborated further in October,
saying it was planning to auto-enroll 150 million Google accounts
in 2FA by the end of the year.
....
Google's support page details the auto-enrollment process. The
company says accounts that have been flagged for 2FA will get an
email or notification about seven days before the requirement is
enforced.

note that google is *forcefully* *transitioning* users.

Your Name wrote:

> As usual, the moronic troll, having been proven wrong, now changes his
> fictional nonsense to yet more brainless crap.

I find it interesting that "Your Name" said that Windows costs money when
you upgrade, and multiple people (some of whom are his fellow iKooks) had
to explain to him that his belief system was based on exactly zero facts.

The fact was that the _entire_ belief system of Your Name... was imaginary.

Then... after _that_ event occurred in this very thread... he calls
everyone else... a "moronic troll". You have to see the humor in that.

HINT: He's so stupid that he doesn't even realize how stupid he really is.

> Try running the latest version of Microsoft's Edge web browser on
> Windows 3.0 computer. Try running the latest version of whatever crappy
> Android web browser on an Android 1.0 mobile device.

Assuming anyone on this child-like Apple newsgroup is an adult, here is a
"fair fight" factual comparison we can make that will provide some facts.

a. Tell us what the oldest iOS is that the newest Safari loads & works on.
b. I will look up the oldest Android that the newest Chrome does the same.

That's an objective starting point for an _adult_ discussion, is it not?
--
This comparison was requested moments ago in this adult factual thread.
*Why do Apple operating systems *just die* while all modern operating systems last, essentially, almost forever?*
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/T_-7sEITUKs>

nospam wrote:

>> Try running the latest version of Microsoft's Edge web browser on
>> Windows 3.0 computer.
>
> no need to go back that far. it doesn't work on early win10 versions.

As someone already said in this thread, it might not be fair to compare
desktops to mobile devices, because desktops are so mature that Windows 10
will still work just fine on desktops built before iOS even existed.

Given Widnows 10 is the most common version out there today, a more fair
comparison would probably be to compare what Windows 10 works on versus
what the most common current Mac OS works on.

But this thread is more about mobile devices, not the fact that Windows
works on desktops built before the first release of iOS ever shipped.

What would be more appropriate is to compare mobile platforms instead.

Here's a fair comparison, is it not?
a. Tell us what the oldest iOS is that the newest Safari loads & works on.
b. I will look up the oldest Android that the newest Chrome does the same.

That's an objective starting point for an _adult_ discussion, is it not?
--
This comparison was requested moments ago in this adult factual thread.
*Why do Apple operating systems *just die* while all modern operating
systems last, essentially, almost forever?*
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/T_-7sEITUKs>

In article <tcpe4s$1vpt$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:

> Windows 10
> will still work just fine on desktops built before iOS even existed.

no it doesn't. at best it's very, very slow and not the latest version
either.

15 year old pcs no longer get win10 updates, stopping around 1903 or so
(give or take), which has been eol'ed and is no longer supported by
microsoft.

<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/lifecycle/announcements/windows-10-190
3-end-of-servicing>
Windows 10, version 1903 will reach the end of service on December 8,
2020.

nospam wrote:

>> Again, your entire argument is based on Apple's marketing bullshit.
>
> it's not marketing bullshit. tap to pay is an extremely useful feature,
> one that you clearly don't understand.

You don't seem to own the cognitive skills to comprehend that you can
cherry pick _any_ functionality on the planet, and then compare two
different makers of that functionality, and then argue one is better than
the other using your own personal comparitive assessment weights.

It's like comparing a Bimmer to a Mercedes.
There will _always_ be differences you may care about.

Say one doesn't come in red for example - and you happen to like red.
Then you'll claim the functionality is better.

Just like iPhone colors are a desperate attempt at differentiation.

But this is a digression which you foisted upon us because you _hate_ the
fact that iOS app updates die far sooner than apps on any other platform

>> First off, if it requires 2FA,
>> you don't seem to own the adult comprehensive skills to know that Apple
>> refuses to allow you to _ever_ turn 2FA off once you set it up (after the
>> short grace period expires).
>
> good thing google doesn't do that.

This is an _adult_ conversation...
The problem with iKooks is you think everyone is as gullible as you are.

Google is eager to follow Apple's anti-privacy lead so I wouldn't doubt
that Google would hope its customer base is as gullible as Apple's base is.
<https://i.postimg.cc/YqWvzF4W/fairemail02.jpg> Android OTP options

As you may be well aware, I've been following the recent May 30th 2022
attempt by Google to trade our privacy for security - where only very
recently the free ad free GSF free privacy based apps finally recovered
from Google's attack on privacy with the implementation of web OAUth.
<https://i.postimg.cc/nhHFRK3L/fairemail03.jpg> web-OAuth example

Until then, I wasn't able to privately read Google gmail on Android from
May 30th, 2022, to about July 25th, 2022 (but I can now - which is what
matters - but which took work by Marcel & Christian to update web-OAuth).

> note that google is *forcefully* *transitioning* users.

As you may be aware from the adult OS newsgroups, I was in frequent contact
with the developer of Fair Email and that of K-9 Mail (now part of
Thunderbird's suite of tools) where Marcel & Christian worked together to
overcome Google's not-so-hidden attempt at forcing users into 2FA/2SV.

While Google certainly pulled an anti-privacy trick out of Apple's own
2SV/2FA playbook, as far as I'm aware, web-OAUth overcomes that attempt.

At this point, I'm unaware of any "successful" attempt at forcing typical
privacy-conscious Android google email server users into the hated 2FA/2SV.

However, if you know more than I do about Google "forcing" 2FA/2SV on
people like me who simply want to read mail on Google servers, please
post facts - not bullshit.
<https://i.postimg.cc/Jz0TvyKQ/fairemail01.jpg> FairEmail auth options

nospam wrote:

>> Windows 10
>> will still work just fine on desktops built before iOS even existed.
>
> no it doesn't. at best it's very, very slow and not the latest version
> either.

I noticed you are afraid of the question nospam, about what the oldest
hardware is that the current macOS works on... versus that of Windows 10.

Normally that means you _hate_ what the answer is to that question, nospam.

> 15 year old pcs no longer get win10 updates, stopping around 1903 or so
> (give or take), which has been eol'ed and is no longer supported by
> microsoft.

Again, you bullshit nospam.

Again you bullshit because you _hate_ all facts showing how poorly iOS and
the macOS are updated compared to Android and Windows (and/or Linux).

The fact remains a fact, nospam, whether or not you _hate_ that fact.
*No common operating system dies _sooner_ than does your beloved iOS*

> <https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/lifecycle/announcements/windows-10-190
> 3-end-of-servicing>
> Windows 10, version 1903 will reach the end of service on December 8,
> 2020.

And yet, my ancient circa 2009 desktop (which likely started as Windows 7)
is still updated frequently by Microsoft as far as I can tell.

But more importantly than the fact Windows support lasts far longer than
does macOS support, *iOS support is the _shortest_ of all common OSs*.

*No common consumer operating system has _shorter_ support than does iOS*

That simple fact is what you _hate_ nospam.
And yet, you have no _adult_ response to that simple fact.

In fact, most of the iKooks already tried to lie their way around that fact
by claiming that they could update Safari outside the iOS update cycle.

And yet that is a lie.

The iKooks either know it's a lie, or the iKooks don't.
a. If they lied, then that shows how much they _hate_ the facts, and,
b. If they didn't purposefully lie, then they're incredibly ignorant.

Pick one.

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <tcpe4s$1vpt$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
> <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>> Windows 10
>> will still work just fine on desktops built before iOS even existed.
>
> no it doesn't. at best it's very, very slow and not the latest version
> either.
>
> 15 year old pcs no longer get win10 updates, stopping around 1903 or so
> (give or take), which has been eol'ed and is no longer supported by
> microsoft.
>
> <https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/lifecycle/announcements/windows-10-190
> 3-end-of-servicing>
> Windows 10, version 1903 will reach the end of service on December 8,
> 2020.
>
I think this has gotten far afield from the OP which was narrowly about how
long after iOS 16 is released will phones stuck with iOS 15 be supported
with updates. Some might not want the iPhone 13 yet not want to wait
through the buzz over iPhone 14 dying down after its release.