AJL wrote:

>> All in all, with smartphones/tablets, things go way too fast for my
>> liking, for no good reason.
>
> Planned obsolescence?

Seems to me common consumer electronics just get better, faster, and
cheaper except highly-marketed electronics, which gets better, faster, but
more expensive over the years (due exclusively to marketing fooling
idiots).

My first Android phones were upwards of $800 for example, and then they
dropped to half that, half again, and half that too, until now they're all
free.

And they last longer too, even as the batteries are almost all no longer
user replaceable (but at least they still have sdcard slots and aux jacks
and the great thing about the batteries is they're huge nowadays).

I tell people they'd be idiots if they buy a phone today that isn't at
least 5 amp hours (you can practically start your car with them now).

That huge battery, alone, is what helps on longevity of smartphones.
--
Posted out of the goodness of my heart to disseminate useful information.

On 6/14/2022 9:06 AM, AJL wrote:
> On 6/14/2022 2:46 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>> AJL <noemail@none.org> wrote:
>>> Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
>
>>>> I hate it that smartphones, tablets, etc.. have become devices
>>>> which don't last more than three years or so, due to the battery
>>>> or/and Android version running out.
>
>>> I'm currently posting with one of my Fire tablets. Though Amazon
>>> keeps its Fire OS up to date it is actually an older version of
>>> Android. It seems to run all my sideloaded apps just fine. And a
>>> bonus is that it runs older no longer supported apps like this
>>> Groundhog newsreader that my phone won't...
>
>> My previous phone lasted a little less than four years, but that
>> took a lot of handholding and in the end it was unbearingly slow.
>
> Wonder why. All my toys pretty much stayed the same (start slow-end
> slow, start fast-end fast) while I had them. Admittedly I don't keep
> them as long as you, usually under 2 years before passing them on.

Because of all the junk loaded over time?

On 6/14/2022 7:18 PM, Bob F wrote:
> On 6/14/2022 9:06 AM, AJL wrote:
>> On 6/14/2022 2:46 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:

>>> My previous phone lasted a little less than four years, but that
>>> took a lot of handholding and in the end it was unbearingly
>>> slow.

>> Wonder why. All my toys pretty much stayed the same (start slow-end
>> slow, start fast-end fast) while I had them.

> Because of all the junk loaded over time?

I suppose it depends on the device. All the devices I've had
have given me control over the amount of junk that was loaded.
And the ability to unload the offending junk if things slowed
too much. But as always YMMV...

On 6/14/22 8:53 PM, AJL wrote:
> On 6/14/2022 7:18 PM, Bob F wrote:
>> On 6/14/2022 9:06 AM, AJL wrote:
>>> On 6/14/2022 2:46 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>
>>>> My previous phone lasted a little less than four years, but that
>>>> took a lot of handholding and in the end it was unbearingly
>>>> slow.
>
>>> Wonder why. All my toys pretty much stayed the same (start slow-end
>>> slow, start fast-end fast) while I had them.
>
>> Because of all the junk loaded over time?
>
> I suppose it depends on the device. All the devices I've had
> have given me control over the amount of junk that was loaded.
> And the ability to unload the offending junk if things slowed
> too much. But as always YMMV...

I've only used half of the Pixel2's 128GB in 2 years, most of which is
apps I've downloaded. I'm happy.

--
Cheers, Bev
"Johnston [Island] was the home of a U.S. chemical weapons disposal
facility for 10 years before operations ended in November 2000.
The island was turned into a wildlife preserve."
© 2002 The Associated Press

On 6/14/2022 10:34 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
> On 6/14/22 8:53 PM, AJL wrote:
>> On 6/14/2022 7:18 PM, Bob F wrote:
>>> On 6/14/2022 9:06 AM, AJL wrote:
>>>> On 6/14/2022 2:46 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:

>>>>> My previous phone lasted a little less than four years, but
>>>>> that took a lot of handholding and in the end it was
>>>>> unbearingly slow.

>>>> Wonder why. All my toys pretty much stayed the same (start
>>>> slow-end slow, start fast-end fast) while I had them.

>>> Because of all the junk loaded over time?

>> I suppose it depends on the device. All the devices I've had have
>> given me control over the amount of junk that was loaded. And the
>> ability to unload the offending junk if things slowed too much. But
>> as always YMMV...

> I've only used half of the Pixel2's 128GB in 2 years, most of which
> is apps I've downloaded.

Just checked my Galaxy S10+. I've got 96GB free of 128GB storage and
3.9GB free of 8GB memory. I have a 'Clean Now' button but have never
felt the need to try it. The S10+ has always seemed the fastest of any
of my Android toys and with no noticeable speed degradation from when it
was new. But then it's only 2 3/4 years along so things could change as
it gets still older I suppose.

> I'm happy.

Me too.

But has your phone seemed to slow down over time? Frank said his last
phone was unbearably slow after less than 4 years (above). I'm thinking
perhaps it was a specific device problem?

Bob F <bobnospam@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 6/14/2022 9:06 AM, AJL wrote:
> > On 6/14/2022 2:46 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> >> AJL <noemail@none.org> wrote:
> >>> Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >>>> I hate it that smartphones, tablets, etc.. have become devices
> >>>> which don't last more than three years or so, due to the battery
> >>>> or/and Android version running out.
> >
> >>> I'm currently posting with one of my Fire tablets. Though Amazon
> >>> keeps its Fire OS up to date it is actually an older version of
> >>> Android. It seems to run all my sideloaded apps just fine. And a
> >>> bonus is that it runs older no longer supported apps like this
> >>> Groundhog newsreader that my phone won't...
> >
> >> My previous phone lasted a little less than four years, but that
> >> took a lot of handholding and in the end it was unbearingly slow.
> >
> > Wonder why. All my toys pretty much stayed the same (start slow-end
> > slow, start fast-end fast) while I had them. Admittedly I don't keep
> > them as long as you, usually under 2 years before passing them on.
>
> Because of all the junk loaded over time?

Over the 'lifetime' of the phone, I of course installed (and
uninstalled) apps, but as I mentioned/implied and like AJL wrote, I
uninstalled unneccessary apps and removed any 'junk' (also with help of
analyzing/cleaning utilities).

Anyway, what matters is only the apps with you actually use/run and
any (part of) apps which are running in the background. It does not
matter how much 'junk' there is in Internal Storage (was only 8GB on
this device), nor on the MicroSD card.

Running apps either fit in RAM or they don't, they don't run slow.
AFAIK, Android, at least in 5.0, doesn't have any kind of paging/
swapping.

Yes, for *some* apps speed might depend on the amount of RAM available
for buffering, temporary storage, etc., but that's (IMO) not common for
your usual run-of-the-mill apps.

FWIW, the app which tipped the scale was the offline navigation app
OsmAnd+. Navigation itself worked fine, but setting/changing the next
waypoint became too slow (many minutes), even when the waypoint was and
would be on the already calculated and mapped route.

As usual, YMMV/YMWV.

Anyway, my current phone has 128GB of Internal Storage, still 77GB
free and 4GB of RAM.

On 6/14/2022 11:38 PM, AJL wrote:
> On 6/14/2022 10:34 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
>> On 6/14/22 8:53 PM, AJL wrote:
>>> On 6/14/2022 7:18 PM, Bob F wrote:
>>>> On 6/14/2022 9:06 AM, AJL wrote:
>>>>> On 6/14/2022 2:46 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>
>>>>>> My previous phone lasted a little less than four years, but
>>>>>> that took a lot of handholding and in the end it was
>>>>>> unbearingly slow.
>
>>>>> Wonder why. All my toys pretty much stayed the same (start
>>>>> slow-end slow, start fast-end fast) while I had them.
>
>>>> Because of all the junk loaded over time?
>
>>> I suppose it depends on the device. All the devices I've had have
>>> given me control over the amount of junk that was loaded. And the
>>> ability to unload the offending junk if things slowed too much. But
>>> as always YMMV...
>
>> I've only used half of the Pixel2's 128GB in 2 years, most of which
>> is apps I've downloaded.
>
> Just checked my Galaxy S10+. I've got 96GB free of 128GB storage and
> 3.9GB free of 8GB memory. I have a 'Clean Now' button but have never
> felt the need to try it. The S10+ has always seemed the fastest of any
> of my Android toys and with no noticeable speed degradation from when it
> was new. But then it's only 2 3/4 years along so things could change as
> it gets still older I suppose.
>
>> I'm happy.
>
> Me too.
>
> But has your phone seemed to slow down over time? Frank said his last
> phone was unbearably slow after less than 4 years (above). I'm thinking
> perhaps it was a specific device problem?

I wonder how many of those problems could be fixed with a factory reset.

AJL wrote:

> But has your phone seemed to slow down over time? Frank said his last
> phone was unbearably slow after less than 4 years (above). I'm thinking
> perhaps it was a specific device problem?

I haven't kept up with this thread as the initial post was almost
incomprehensible, but to the point of a phone slowing down, if it's slowing
down there's something wrong. It's _not_ that the phone is old.

That mainly happens with iPhones which get throttled on purpose due to
software required because of the extremely poor design of the power
delivery systems.

Whomever it was who had the slowed-down phone should just figure out what
that is as I don't know of any Android hardware power delivery design so
poorly made that it has to be throttled _forever_ (not just due to a
software bug) due to extremely poor hardware design.
--
Apple has never made a best-in-class SOC and the hardware bugs in the M1
processor prove that point in spades (they're also in the A14 processor).

The Real Bev wrote:
> I've only used half of the Pixel2's 128GB in 2 years, most of which is
> apps I've downloaded. I'm happy.

I have 64GB on my free Samsung and I have something like 700 apps installed
and still _plenty_ of room (what with the expansion slot for all my data).

In my humble opinion, 64GB is just fine (although more is always merrier).
--
Posted out of the goodness of my heart to disseminate useful information.

On 6/15/22 10:00 AM, Andy Burnelli wrote:
> In my humble opinion, 64GB is just fine

Or even less. This cheapie $98 Chromebook I'm
posting with only has 32GB of storage and works
just fine. In fact I still have 17GB free.

> (although more is always merrier).

Yup. The 100GB online drive it's hooked
to does help a bit... ;)

"Andy Burnelli" <spam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:t8d36b$1g7k$1@gioia.aioe.org...
> The Real Bev wrote:
>
>> I've only used half of the Pixel2's 128GB in 2 years, most of which is
>> apps I've downloaded. I'm happy.
>
> I have 64GB on my free Samsung and I have something like 700 apps
> installed
> and still _plenty_ of room (what with the expansion slot for all my data).
>
> In my humble opinion, 64GB is just fine (although more is always merrier).

The problem is that a lot of apps don't seem to be written to allow you to
store them and their cache in external SD card as an alternative to internal
storage. I've got almost all the apps that allow it to use the SD card,
leaving only the internal-only apps on internal storage. And all data
(music, audio books, camera photos etc) on SD card.

My phone's System | Device Maintenance | Storage screen shows "System/user
data 27 GB" and "Available space 5 GB". I presume the internal storage is
nominally 32 GB = 27 (used) + 5 (available).

What is weird is that in the "User Data" section,
Documents+Images+Audio+Videos totals about 100 MB and Applications is 8 GB.
I wonder where the rest of the 27 GB of storage is being used: it can't all
be the OS!

Cleaner only offers to remove another 266 MB.

NY wrote:

> The problem is that a lot of apps don't seem to be written to allow you to
> store them and their cache in external SD card as an alternative to internal
> storage.

While there are "some" apps that don't have the option to put data in
external storage, I would argue that "most well-written apps" do.

For example, name a common app functionality that you feel most of us would
want and then we can look up whether or not we can find a well-written app
that _does_ allow its large data to be stored on external sd card storage.

Don't name an app by brand name though - but by app functionality please.

> I've got almost all the apps that allow it to use the SD card,
> leaving only the internal-only apps on internal storage. And all data
> (music, audio books, camera photos etc) on SD card.

I agree with NY that almost all well-written data-intensive apps allow that
large data to be stored on the external sdcard.

Examples in addition to the music, audio, camera and video that NY
mentioned are offline navigation apps, youtube downloader apps,
APK-extractor apps, etc.

Note that what matters isn't so much the apps that store puny amounts of
data (e.g., my Nova launcher can save its backup to sdcard storage but that
backup is puny, just as my FOSS contacts and calendar apps can "export" to
external storage, but that's usually a puny amount data).

What other app functionalities use a _large_ amount of data that we'd want
to offload to external storage?

> My phone's System | Device Maintenance | Storage screen shows "System/user
> data 27 GB" and "Available space 5 GB". I presume the internal storage is
> nominally 32 GB = 27 (used) + 5 (available).
> What is weird is that in the "User Data" section,
> Documents+Images+Audio+Videos totals about 100 MB and Applications is 8 GB.
> I wonder where the rest of the 27 GB of storage is being used: it can't all
> be the OS!

Just an aside we all know about is that the OS uses a healthy chunk of the
internal storage (what is the size of the typical default carrier-bloated
Android nowadays? Maybe up to 8GB or 10GB?)

> Cleaner only offers to remove another 266 MB.

There's a nice free app that breaks down storage usage pretty nicely.
*DiskUsage* by Ivan Volosyuk
Free, ad free, gsf free, rated 4.5, 1M+ downloads
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.diskusage>
--
Posted out of the goodness of my heart to disseminate useful information.

sms used his or her keyboard to write :

> On 6/11/2022 9:20 AM, NY wrote:
>
>> I don't know how robust and rugged USB-C is in relation to Micro-USB. I
>> find that that Micro-USB cables last about 6 months before the contacts
>> start to be intermittent. Sometimes it is the plug itself which fails,
>> other times it is the cable right next to the plug.
>
> Yes, Micro-USB is a pain. USB-C is much better than Micro-USB, and
> better than Lightning as well.
>
> USB-C Has Multiple Advantages over Lightning
>
> 1. The USB-C device-side connector is a double-sided printed circuit
> board, inside a steel shell, with 12 contacts on each side, all of which
> can be used at the same time. The USB-C ¡§male¡š connector, on the cable,
> has 24 spring-metal pins (12 on each side) inside a steel shell.
>
> 2. The Lightning device-side connector has 8 spring metal contacts while
> the Lightning cable has a printed circuit board with 8 contacts per side
> (one side is used at a time). The device side has spring-steel retention
> wings on each side that hold the Lightning cable male end into the
> iPhone or iPad. The likely parts of the connector pair to wear out are
> the spring metal pins and the retention wings as metal fatigue
> eventually weakens the metal. It¡Šs at least a $100 repair to replace the
> Lightning port. With USB-C, if there¡Šs a problem it¡Šs usually on the
> cable side so you just get a new cable. With Lightning you¡Šre facing an
> expensive repair or replacement.
>
> 3. USB-C supports much higher charging wattage because there are
> multiple power and ground lines.
>
> 4. USB-C supports much faster data transfer because it uses multiple
> differential pairs for data
>
> 5. USB-C cables have no electronics built-into the cable while Lightning
> ¡§MFi¡š cables have circuitry inside the connector, and Apple charges
> royalties for the use of MFi. As a result, USB-C cables are much less
> costly. A USB-C to Lightning cable, that is MFi compliant and that
> actually supports fast charging is at least $12. A USB-C to USB-C cable
> that supports fast charging is as little as $1.
>
> 6. Lightning connectors are more likely to break off on the cable end,
> see Fix a stuck broken-off Apple Lightning cable connector tip! ¡V
> SeriouslyTrivial.com at
> <https://www.seriouslytrivial.com/2016/01/23/fix-a-stuck-broken-off-apple-lightning-cable-connector-tip/>.

I'm happy the eu has mandated a common cable.

I don't really care which cable.

Let the market pick that one cable.

And then let the government mandate it.

Works for me.

John McGaw wrote:

>> My phone has an 85% setting which says right on it that it saves battery
>> life.
>
> I've never noticed that on my phone although it might be there buried
> somewhere I haven't thought to look but under the settings > battery
> section all it has is "battery usage", "battery saver", "adaptive
> preferences", "battery share" and "battery percentage". I figure that the
> adaptive charging procedure is gentle enough that there should be no worry
> about damage from frequent charging to 100% that some people worry about.

I just looked for you and documented the steps pictorially for you to see:
sys > settings > battery and device care > battery > More battery settings
Protect battery = on/off
"To extend the lifespan of your battery, limit the maximum charge to 85%"

So that everyone can benefit from that effort, I just made these for you:
<https://i.postimg.cc/tCHNgt40/charging17.jpg> Android 12 Battery Settings
<https://i.postimg.cc/SR9dvgQd/charging18.jpg> Stop charging at 85%
--
I create all these screenshots purely out of the goodness of my heart to
disseminate useful information for the purpose of being kind & helpful to
others who deserve and appreciate that kindness and helpfulness.
<https://i.postimg.cc/qvHYTf3L/charging01.jpg> Huge charging indicators
<https://i.postimg.cc/cL7z1D7N/charging02.jpg> Customizable sound alert
<https://i.postimg.cc/CKFQRjJn/charging03.jpg> All sorts of indicators
<https://i.postimg.cc/jSX2j0Mj/charging04.jpg> Tested many battery apps
<https://i.postimg.cc/sXBgKBsB/charging05.jpg> Usage & predictive graphs
<https://i.postimg.cc/8CCjC1VT/charging06.jpg> Big percentage indicators
<https://i.postimg.cc/yNrWgwVc/charging07.jpg> Evertyhing you'd want
<https://i.postimg.cc/gchrjS1L/charging08.jpg> Resize widgets to taste
<https://i.postimg.cc/9fSngSyH/charging09.jpg> Charging settings & chimes
<https://i.postimg.cc/Hs8srGDF/charging10.jpg> 4 hour slow charge
<https://i.postimg.cc/W1D9dNqw/charging11.jpg> Fastcharge in about 2 hrs
<https://i.postimg.cc/T1CkDhcC/charging12.jpg> Fastcharge in about 2 hrs
<https://i.postimg.cc/zGvhGxSb/charging13.jpg> Fastcharge in 2-1/4 hours
<https://i.postimg.cc/FK7RLSby/charging14.jpg> Multi-port USB chargers
<https://i.postimg.cc/W1rgxwNB/charging15.jpg> Fastcharge in 2-3/4 hours
<https://i.postimg.cc/PJ2G9HsG/charging16.jpg> New battery settings
<https://i.postimg.cc/tCHNgt40/charging17.jpg> Android 12 Battery Settings
<https://i.postimg.cc/SR9dvgQd/charging18.jpg> Stop charging at 85%

"Andy Burnelli" <spam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:t8femf$1vae$1@gioia.aioe.org...
> NY wrote:
>
>> The problem is that a lot of apps don't seem to be written to allow you
>> to store them and their cache in external SD card as an alternative to
>> internal storage.
>
> While there are "some" apps that don't have the option to put data in
> external storage, I would argue that "most well-written apps" do.
>
> For example, name a common app functionality that you feel most of us
> would
> want and then we can look up whether or not we can find a well-written app
> that _does_ allow its large data to be stored on external sd card storage.
>
> Don't name an app by brand name though - but by app functionality please.

Here's the list of apps on my phone (brand name and functionality) which
cannot be moved from internal to SD card (there is no option to choose
internal/SD, unlike for well-behaved apps):

BBC Sounds: play-on-demand BBC Radio programmes

Borrowbox: read lending-library books on phone (ties in with corresponding
software on library's server)

Whatsapp: online meetings/screen-sharing

(Microsoft) OneNote: sharing of documents between phones/computers

(Philips) Hue: control Philips Hue lamps etc

Dropbox: File sharing between phones/computers

Hive: Control central heating temperatures and schedules

Firefox: web browser

HereWeGo (aka HereMaps): satnav

HP Smart: printer driver/comms for HP printers

JuiceSSH: SSH terminal access to (mainly Linux) servers

Kasa: control/monitor (mains electricity) smart sockets

Outdoor Active: view GPS position/tracks/routes on various maps such as (UK)
Ordnance Survey

AVG: Antivirus

iFit: watch fitness videos and monitor treadmill/rowing machine performance

Some of them are fairly generic, such as Firefox, Whatsapp, Dropbox, AVG.
Others are specific to (and supplied for use with) proprietary hardware
(Hive, Kasa, Hue).