On 2023-12-03 19:23, rocco portelli wrote:
> Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
>
>>> You keep using the word "replaced" as if you believe that something was
>>> replaced. But all you've said was something was removed that was working.
>>
>> To be clear, the functionality remains, the form of it remains.
>>
>> Like wheels today use steel bearings lubricated with synthetic grease
>> and not wood lubricated with tallow.
>
> In other words, your thought process was absurd because they removed it.
> They didn't replace it with anything. YOU REPLACED IT WITH SOMETHING.

I didn't change the port. Apple did. And it has no effect on me - nor
many many many millions of people.

Get over yourself.

--
“Markets can remain irrational longer than your can remain solvent.”
- John Maynard Keynes.

Peter, 2023-11-26 23:58:

> Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
>>>>> I only needed to search for 30 seconds.
>>>>
>>>> You win - 100 points! Congratulations!!!!
>>>
>>> Instead of blurting childish insults why not just apologize for being wrong
>>> and for not thinking before you posted what you posted about aux ports?
>>
>> "You win" is not enough?
>
> Whatever you say is "enough" if you get into your thick skull that most
> Android models sold today have the very useful ports, slots & radios.

Yep - USB-C is very useful ;-)

--
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de

Carlos E. R., 2023-11-27 11:53:

> On 2023-11-26 23:59, Alan wrote:
[...]
>> But what percentage of people USE those ports?
>
> What percentage uses any particular feature or app?
>
> Does a feature need to have 90% usage in order not not be removed?

Features get removed when vendors realize, that they still can sell a
product without it. The number of people who use that feature is
irrelevant as long as they still buy devices without it.

--
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de

On 4/12/2023, Arno Welzel wrote:

>> Does a feature need to have 90% usage in order not not be removed?
>
> Features get removed when vendors realize, that they still can sell a
> product without it. The number of people who use that feature is
> irrelevant as long as they still buy devices without it.

But that's not what is happening here because most Android phones have it.
So Android resale values don't have to add buying what was removed.

What's happening here is nobody who is on Android is complaining about the
loss of the functionality - it's only the Apple people who are complaining.

And that makes sense because only the Apple phones don't have it at all.
That's why Apple resale value has to account for buying what was removed.

On 2023-12-04 15:04, Larry Wolff wrote:
> On 4/12/2023, Arno Welzel wrote:
>
>>> Does a feature need to have 90% usage in order not not be removed?
>>
>> Features get removed when vendors realize, that they still can sell a
>> product without it. The number of people who use that feature is
>> irrelevant as long as they still buy devices without it.
>
> But that's not what is happening here because most Android phones have it.
> So Android resale values don't have to add buying what was removed.
>
> What's happening here is nobody who is on Android is complaining about the
> loss of the functionality - it's only the Apple people who are complaining.
>
> And that makes sense because only the Apple phones don't have it at all.
> That's why Apple resale value has to account for buying what was removed.

The Apple people have lost no functionality.

On 12/4/2023 8:32 PM, Alan wrote:

> The Apple people have lost no functionality.

Your argument that it has "lost no functionality" is absurd.
Especially given Apple removed all basic hardware (which includes
not only basic jacks, but also slots, radios, & chargers).

Try this in order to understand why your argument is ridiculous.
Take a phone that has the aux port and plug that port with cement.

How do you do what the port did for you without buying more stuff?

If you buy more stuff just to make it work, then add that to the resale
value calculations. Otherwise, the resale value is a complete farce.

An iPhone is always going to cost more than Android when you take into
account the total costs of ownership of constantly making it work again.

After Apple removes all basic hardware (jacks, slots, radios, chargers).

On 2023-12-05 00:59, Larry Wolff wrote:
> On 12/4/2023 8:32 PM, Alan wrote:
>
>> The Apple people have lost no functionality.
>
> Your argument that it has "lost no functionality" is absurd.
> Especially given Apple removed all basic hardware (which includes
> not only basic jacks, but also slots, radios, & chargers).

1. The function of a charger is to allow you to recharge the battery.
That functionality hasn't been removed. Most people already have
numerous chargers from previous purchases (I myself have at least 3 or 4).

2. iPhones never had an FM radio, so that could never have been removed.

....and...

>
> Try this in order to understand why your argument is ridiculous.
> Take a phone that has the aux port and plug that port with cement.

....3. Does the phone have a Lightning port? Because it does, then I
already have all the functionality that that 3.5mm audio jack provided.

>
> How do you do what the port did for you without buying more stuff?

I buy appropriate stuff for port I DO have, duh!

>
> If you buy more stuff just to make it work, then add that to the resale
> value calculations. Otherwise, the resale value is a complete farce.

Does every phone with a 3.5mm audio jack come with earbuds?

>
> An iPhone is always going to cost more than Android when you take into
> account the total costs of ownership of constantly making it work again.
>
> After Apple removes all basic hardware (jacks, slots, radios, chargers).

Show your work.

Do a concrete example.

I dare you.