nospam wrote:

> how about you go through it and add all of the things iphones can do
> that android cannot, ones which you conveniently neglected to mention.

*There will _never_ be app functionality on iOS not already on Android.*

In fact, every time I ask you to *name just one* app functionality that is
on iOS that isn't long ago already on Android, you can't name even one.

What you do is you desperately google for a list of all known Apple
trademarks, and then you post that list of scores of trademarks nospam.

What you can't do is pick just the most important feature that you "think"
iOS has that Android doesn't have - because even that one - doesn't exist.

There is a good reason you never can find even a single one nospam,
and that's simply because Apple restricts what people can do.

Google can't.

What's no longer shocking is a concept that simple can't be comprehended by
the low IQ uneducated iKooks because they believe trademarks are functions.

nospam wrote:

> with his claims such as apple's face id doesn't work in the dark, his
> credibility is already at the bottom of the ocean.

Hi nospam,

Stop it.
You act like a child.

Grow up.

You keep claiming that faceid bone but you don't remember how many times
you've brazenly fabricated imaginary functionality for iOS that doesn't
exist.

Do you want me to bring up that you claimed graphical wi-fi debugging for
iOS for years on end now, nospam, and yet you were wrong then as now.

Neither you nor Steve has any claim to credibility, and the fact you keep
bringing it up means I'll have to bring up all your similar fabrications.

Steve lies because he has a political agenda in _everything_ he does.
You lie because you defend Apple to the death, no matter what.

Neither of you are any more credible than a Russian diplomat.
You're both liars.

What bothers me is you both think the rest of us are stupid because for you
both to lie so brazenly means you _think_ we believe your brazen lies.
--
(naq lrf, lbh jba'g or noyr gb erfvfg zbqvslvat gung jvgu lbhe ybj VD)

nospam wrote:

> you also falsely claim that the in-screen fingerprint sensors found on
> various android phones are more secure, yet *numerous* tests show
> otherwise, along with those sensors being slow and unreliable, more so
> than a dedicated sensor.

Neither Steve nor nospam are kind-hearted nice or credible people.
Both are horribly inveterate (and rather despicable) brazen liars.

Neither has earned any credibility.
They both lie most of the time but for completely different reasons:

*Steve lies because he has a political agenda in _everything_ he does*
*nospam lies because he will defend Apple to the death, no matter what*

They're both liars.
While Steve's IQ is vastly higher than nospam, he's still rather stupid.

Not as stupid as Alan Browne or Jolly Roger perhaps, but still stupid.
And that's OK.

What bothers me is they both think the rest of us are stupid because for
them to lie so brazenly means they _think_ we believe their brazen lies.

nospam wrote:

>> In short: his document is only to propagate his agenda unchallenged -
>> misinformation and all.
>
> all while claiming how perfect it is and that he is the sole expert on
> everything.

Both Steve (who is also Hank Jones) and nospam are inveterate liars.
For different reasons...

*Steve lies because he always furthers his political agenda*
*nospam lies because he will defend Apple to the death, no matter what*

What bothers me about both is neither has a good-hearted bone in their body.
They're both horridly ugly despicably unprepossessing human beings inside.

I hope they prove me wrong; but they don't - because what I say is true.

Jolly Roger wrote:

>> Maybe he doesn�t see your corrections because he�s blocked so many
>> people.
>
> That's *his* problem.

While it's rare that I so easily agree with either nospam or Jolly Roger,
let alone both of them at once, Steve has no interest in correcting his
doc.

What Steve (aka Hank Rogers) does with his document is to use it as his own
personal political tool which he's welcome to do as I have no beef with
that purpose.

But in furthering his political agenda, Steve pays no heed to facts.
So my only beef is that Steve lies when he claims he adheres to facts.

For example, I've proposed _many_ corrections to Steve's document as I know
Android far better than Steve does in many respects - and Steve ignores all
corrections (even ones sent to him anonymously via his claimed email).

Steve has one goal for his document and that's to further his political
agenda.

Fact is NOT one of Steve's goals.
*Steve (aka Hank) is a political animal, through and through.*

Having said that, nospam has only one goal in attacking that document,
which is to defend everything Apple to the death, no matter what.

Neither has any credibility to speak of, where I wills state outright I
also have a goal in posting to this newsgroup, which I've backed up:

1. I wish to learn from and disseminate information about the product,
2. And, I wish to expose the iKooks (and Steve) for what they truly are.

Everything I post is in support of _those_ two goals.
Prove me wrong if you can.
--
UVAG: Lbh pna'g.

nospam wrote:

>> The very fact *iMessage _requires_ a mothership tracking account* is a
>> complete privacy betrayal
>
> *all* messaging apps require what you call a 'mothership tracking
> account'. otherwise, there would be no way to exchange messages.

I don't log into _any_ mothership tracking account when I send and receive
Android messages, nospam, although I know the game that you are playing.

The game you're playing is that a carrier is required and while that is
true, the despicable part of your game is you ignore Apple's ID tracking.

*You literally are completely ignorant that Apple logins are required.*

> or do you somehow think that messages can magically reach their
> destination without any name or account information?

What you are always ignorant of, nospam, is you can't comprehend that on
Android there is no need to log into the Google mothership just to send and
receive text messages, while that need is _required_ on your iPhone.

Yet again, it's no longer shocking how _little_ you know of how iOS works.
--
Cebir zr jebat, abfcnz.
UVAG: Lbh pna'g.

On 2023-02-03, badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>> In article <xn0nxnwor3fgri2009@reader443.eternal-september.org>,
>> badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Well, it IS his document so he can say whatever he wants.
>>
>> yes he can, just as people can (and do) refute his bullshit.
>>
>>> Maybe you should ask for your money back if he charged anything for
>>> reading it.
>>
>> the problem isn't money. it's that he's deliberately and knowingly
>> misleading people. it's not new either. he's done this before with
>> other products.
>>
>
> Obviously the response to this should be a competing document

LOL... "Yes, obviously, only a Google docs list of advocacy talking
points can refute Android advocacy talking points, y'all.
#IAmVerySmart!"

Fuck your idiotic slanted document. It's full of bullshit as you and
your little trollboi gang know.

> This way people can make their own decisions

Newsflash to the nitwit troll gang: People already do make their own
decisions, and 2 billion of them are actively using Apple devices as a
result. And you little boys HATE it so much that you spend hours and
hours every day compiling your little Google docs full of lame, little
advocacy talking points which are mostly just a collection of lies and
disinformation about Apple products, and spamming it every chance you
get in the Apple newsgroups. It's frankly pathetic.

--
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

Jolly Roger wrote:

> Newsflash to the nitwit troll gang: People already do make their own
> decisions, and 2 billion of them are actively using Apple devices as a
> result. And you little boys HATE it so much that you spend hours and
> hours every day compiling your little Google docs full of lame, little
> advocacy talking points which are mostly just a collection of lies and
> disinformation about Apple products, and spamming it every chance you
> get in the Apple newsgroups. It's frankly pathetic.

There is nothing good about Jolly Roger...

He _always_ proves to be one of the most despicable human beings here...

However... what I dislike most about Jolly Roger is his venomously
vitriolic hatred for all facts about Apple which he, himself, wishes to
remain completely ignorant of.

Like all the low-iq ignorant iKooks... it's what they have become.

In article <trkmtg$2s6f1$1@paganini.bofh.team>, Andy Burnelli
<nospam@nospam.net> wrote:

>
> *There will _never_ be app functionality on iOS not already on Android.*

demonstrably false.

> In fact, every time I ask you to *name just one* app functionality that is
> on iOS that isn't long ago already on Android, you can't name even one.

wrong. i've named several and you ignore all of them.

In article <trkpqg$2sfeh$1@paganini.bofh.team>, Andy Burnelli
<nospam@nospam.net> wrote:

>
> What you are always ignorant of, nospam, is you can't comprehend that on
> Android there is no need to log into the Google mothership just to send and
> receive text messages, while that need is _required_ on your iPhone.

false.

> Yet again, it's no longer shocking how _little_ I know of how iOS works.

ftfy, and android too, for that matter.

nospam wrote:

>> What you are always ignorant of, nospam, is you can't comprehend that on
>> Android there is no need to log into the Google mothership just to send and
>> receive text messages, while that need is _required_ on your iPhone.
>
> false.

It's statements like that, nospam, which deny what _everyone_ else knows to
be true, which make me believe you own a truly loathsome character, nospam.

Who could deny what you just brazenly denied, but someone like you are?

Adherence to basic respect for truth isn't a component of your personality.

> ftfy, and android too, for that matter.

That you resort to kindergarten attempts of changing the quoted material
just so that your child-like brain can formulate a retort, is classic.

It's how I know you don't own anywhere near normal adult development.

The _only_ response you have to all facts you are ignorant of, and which
when told you happen to viscerally hate, is to simply deny facts exist.
--
This is posted because I have two goals on this newsgroup, one of which is
to learn and disseminate useful information; the other is to expose iKooks
for the ignorant despicable horribly unprepossessing people they truly are.

nospam wrote:

>> *There will _never_ be app functionality on iOS not already on Android.*
>
> demonstrably false.

*iOS will _always_ have less app functionality than Android*

I am beholden only to the truth, nospam... so if there were, I've _love_ to
know what app functionality is on iOS, all by its itty bitty self, that
isn't (usually already) on Android, all by its itty bitty self.

I _love_ useful functionality, nospam.
And I own both platforms - so I can test your bullshit, nospam.

*I have explained why iOS will _always_ be crippled compared to Android.*

It's impossible for iOS _not_ to be crippled, compared to Android, nospam.

The reason this will always be the case for useful functionality, nospam,
is beyond your comprehension, but I will expound upon this for others.

1. Apple strictly controls what app functionality is on the App Store.
2. Google does too - but Google cannot control typical user sideloading.
3. Hence, any functionality that _people_ want, developers will write.
4. But only for Android - because Apple won't let them on their App Store.

Note that I'm well aware your classic response is that you can write all
the functionality yourself or that you can jailbreak free of Apple
constraints; but we're talking here about normal users, nospam.

What you iKooks don't own the mental capacity to understand, is simple:
A. The iOS app store apps will always be limited by Apple, nospam.
B. Even Google tries to limit what apps are available on its app store.
C. But sideloading is trivial for Android users - which is the difference.

iOS will _always_ have less app functionality than Android as a result.

>> In fact, every time I ask you to *name just one* app functionality that is
>> on iOS that isn't long ago already on Android, you can't name even one.
>
> wrong. i've named several and you ignore all of them.

You easily forget one of my traits, nospam, is an excellent memory.
You can't be well educated if you don't own an excellent memory, IMHO.

The fact is, all you ever do is desperately google for all the Apple
trademarks you can find and then you post that idiotic list every time.

You don't even know yourself what half those trademarks indicate,
(particularly given a trademark is a fluid object in its essence).

You can't even name a _single_ useful app functionality which you claim is
_only on iOS_ that isn't (usually long ago) already available for Android.

If you could, you would - and yet - you can't - so you don't.
*Name just one*
--
HINT: Even Steve alludes to 7 but even he hasn't said what they are.
Personally, I would _love_ for Steve to explain them so I can learn
what he thinks they are, where I suspect I'll find alternatives instantly.

sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

<snip>

> Without AirMessage <https://airmessage.org/>, when an iMessage is sent
> to the phone number for an Android device it is converted to an SMS.
> This works okay for non-group messages, but it is a big issue for
> iMessage group chats. Also, if you have Wi-Fi but no cellular connection
> then you can't send or receive an SMS (such as using Wi-Fi on an
> airplane or at a remote hotel, or with a data-only foreign SIM card). It
> would be wonderful if everyone just used WhatsApp, but in the U.S.
> that's unlikely to happen (and in China WhatsApp is banned, but iMessage
> is not).
>
> This morning I installed the AirMessage server
> <https://github.com/airmessage/airmessage-server/releases/download/v4.1.4/AirMessage-4.1.4.zip>

There's no monitor attached and I was going to buy one of those 7"
<https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09ZD8YS7L> or 10"
<https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09ZDMNZPT/> HDMI monitors. Instead I bought
one of these <https://www.aliexpress.us/item/3256802910022181.html> and
installed the USB Camera Standard app
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=infinitegra.app.usbcamera>
on an old Androd tablet. It works fine as a small monitor for a server.

I splurged on a MacAlly keyboard and mouse
<https://www.centralcomputer.com/macally-mkeyecombo-full-size-usb-keyboard-mousecombo.html>.
I didn't want wireless because when I was doing Open Core Patch I
noticed that my wireless mouse didn't work until MacOS was booted,
whether it was set to Bluetooth or to 2.4GHz.