Nobody else but Apple prevents installer re-use on HW-compatible devices. >>>
Just Apple. It's just one of the many ways Apple fucks their own
customers.
How does it "fuck" them, exactly?
Ahahahahahahaha.
On Fri, 28 Mar 2025 18:04:58 -0500, Hank Rogers wrote :
No other operating system vendor but Apple fucks their customer like that.
On Android, every free APK can be re-used on *any* compatible device.
Same with Windows. Same with Linux.
Only Apple fucks their customer with every single app that is installed.
a. Apple's lies about privacy (there's less privacy on iOS than Android)
b. Apple's app tracking (look it up!)
c. Apple's lock against reuse (of free apps!)
But Apple is a commercial system.
They do not provide free software.
On all systems, you can install
commercial software only on the machines the license entitles you.
If it is one machine, then it is a single, one, machine.
It is perfectly fair for Apple to provide commercial software. Many
companies do the same for other operating systems. Nobody is obligated
to provide their software as free. It is their choice, and no, you can
not blame or insult them for that. Just don't buy it. That's your choice
as customer.
On Sat, 29 Mar 2025 13:33:43 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote :
But Apple is a commercial system.
Hi Carlos,
Both Android & iOS are unique in a way that no other operating system is:
Android is unique in that every app installed has its installer autosaved. Which is a good thing.
iOS is unique in that every app installed is locked to a single Apple ID. Which is a bad thing.
Apple *lied* when they claim iOS is more private than Android when, in
fact, Apple tracks your use of every app by a unique ID inserted by Apple.
No other operating system would *dare* to track its users so invasively.
Just Apple.
They do not provide free software.
We're talking about free app installers that the user downloads & installs.
We're talking about what's *different* about Android from other operating systems, such as that installer APK is always sitting on the file system.
That's unique to Android.
And that's a good thing.
Because that free installer can be re-used at will.
Note that on every operating system other than iOS, you can re-use a free installer on any compatible machine - so what's UNIQUE to Android is the
fact that the free installer is ALWAYS auto-saved to the device itself.
On all systems, you can install commercial software only on the
machines the license entitles you.
Re-use of commercial apps is an (almost) completely different topic.
While payware app installers are also auto-saved on Android, that only
allows the user who bought the app to re-use it within the terms of the purchase.
So, of course payware apps are locked to "something" to prevent re-use.
We're only talking here about free apps, mostly that the user installed (although for Android, the re-use extends also to installed system apps).
If it is one machine, then it is a single, one, machine.
We're talking about what's unique to Android for free apps, which is:
a. Every app installer (free or otherwise) is auto-saved on Android
b. No other operating system auto-saves that installer, by design
On my Android, as you know, I have about 900 free apps installed.
There is the original installer saved on Android for every single one.
That's how Android works. Android never deletes the original APK for installed apps.
And that is a good thing.
Because it allows re-use.
Specifically for free apps that have a "last known good version" APK.
So even if the specific app or specific version is no longer in the repositories, the user can use that app for himself & for billions of
others for as long as the hardware it's being re-used on is compatible.
That's a good thing.
It is perfectly fair for Apple to provide commercial software. Many
companies do the same for other operating systems. Nobody is obligated
to provide their software as free. It is their choice, and no, you can
not blame or insult them for that. Just don't buy it. That's your
choice as customer.
Almost everything about iOS is bad for the user in terms of app re-use.
On every other operating system other than iOS, if the user downloads and installs a free application, that app installer, if saved, still works on *billions* of other similar devices (let's always assume they're compatible in terms of hardware & API levels for the purpose of this discussion).
Only on iOS does a free installer only work for one user & one user only.
That's unique to iOS.
And that's a bad thing.
And only on iOS, does the mothership insert a unique tracking ID into every app, and then Apple uses that tracking ID to invade your privacy every day.
The extent of that privacy invasion inserted on every app is unique to iOS. And that's a bad thing.
The extent of that privacy invasion inserted on every app is unique to iOS. >> And that's a bad thing.
Nah, apple and android both screw their customers, just in different
ways. But neither has been as successful as Trump.
On Sat, 29 Mar 2025 16:00:13 -0500, Hank Rogers wrote :
The extent of that privacy invasion inserted on every app is unique
to iOS.
And that's a bad thing.
Nah, apple and android both screw their customers, just in different
ways. But neither has been as successful as Trump.
I don't disagree that both Apple & Google (and Microsoft too) screw their customers trying to make a buck off of them, but what's unique isn't that.
What's unique to Android that no other operating system does, is Android saves every installer automatically. The installer is always there.
And that's good.
What's unique to Android that no other operating system does, is Android
saves every installer automatically. The installer is always there.
And that's good.
Unless you need the space...
We're talking about free app installers that the user downloads & installs.
We're talking about what's *different* about Android from other operating systems, such as that installer APK is always sitting on the file system.
That's unique to Android.And that's a good thing.
Because that free installer can be re-used at will.
On Sun, 30 Mar 2025 17:04:13 -0700, Alan wrote:
What's unique to Android that no other operating system does, is Android >>> saves every installer automatically. The installer is always there.
And that's good.
Unless you need the space...
With many Android phones you can double the storage space in an instant.
Isaac Montara <[email protected]> wrote:
Both Apple & Google don't want you to have inexpensive reliable storage.
Can you guess why?
ooooh ooooh oooh (raises hand and flags down the professor)...
Let me guess.
Apple gives you 5GB of "free" cloud storage for your 256GB device, which >means you have to multiply that 5GB by about 50 times to store your stuff.
If you want to expand your storage about 200GB, both Apple & Google will >charge you the same low low incredibly low (act fast!) monthly fee of only
a mere pittance of $2.99 per month, which is about $36 for a year (which, >incidentally, is about how much any similar sized sd card would have cost).
But then you need that storage for ten years (or whatever), so now that >one-time NRE of ~$36 would have saved you ~$360 dollars paying for storage.
Since both Apple & Google benefit to the tune of a few hundred dollars per >each person who owns their devices has to pay them, it makes sense why they >don't spend the couple of bucks it would cost for them to put an sdslot in.
On 4/2/25 1:28 AM, Peter wrote:
Isaac Montara <[email protected]> wrote:
Both Apple & Google don't want you to have inexpensive reliable storage. >>> Can you guess why?
ooooh ooooh oooh (raises hand and flags down the professor)...
Let me guess.
Apple gives you 5GB of "free" cloud storage for your 256GB device, which >>means you have to multiply that 5GB by about 50 times to store your stuff.
If you want to expand your storage about 200GB, both Apple & Google will >>charge you the same low low incredibly low (act fast!) monthly fee of only >>a mere pittance of $2.99 per month, which is about $36 for a year (which, >>incidentally, is about how much any similar sized sd card would have cost).
I pay Google 2 bucks/mo US for 1GB.
Not a big $$$ deal for me. YMMV. I use
it for off site backup (like if the house burns down) and it is also conveniently available to any of my devices pretty much anywhere if wanted
or needed. A card just wouldn't provide the same service or use, although I do keep one locally in case Google burns down.
But then you need that storage for ten years (or whatever), so now that >>one-time NRE of ~$36 would have saved you ~$360 dollars paying for storage.
Since both Apple & Google benefit to the tune of a few hundred dollars per >>each person who owns their devices has to pay them, it makes sense why they >>don't spend the couple of bucks it would cost for them to put an sdslot in.
Most all the Google Android devices I've owned over the years were made by
somebody else. And they made the SD slot decision, not Google. An example would be this Chrome OS tablet I'm posting with made by Lenovo. It has no
SD slot and the culprit is...yup...Lenovo...
AJL <[email protected]> wrote:
I pay Google 2 bucks/mo US for 1GB.
Typo. Should be 100GB
Not a big $$$ deal for me. YMMV. I use
it for off site backup (like if the house burns down) and it is also
conveniently available to any of my devices pretty much anywhere if wanted >>> or needed. A card just wouldn't provide the same service or use, although I >>> do keep one locally in case Google burns down.
My only problem with that thought process is that it's a justification for >NOT having something. It's like a guy with only one leg justifying why he's >hopping all the time. Phones with the sdcard slot can hop just like you do.
The point was that Apple & Google don't put the sd card slot in phones for
a reason, which is NOT that they want to give you the best phone possible.
They want to cut off your leg so that you buy their prosthetic device.
I pay Google 2 bucks/mo US for 1GB. Not a big $$$ deal for me. YMMV. I use it for off site
backup (like if the house burns down) and it is also conveniently available to any of my
devices pretty much anywhere if wanted or needed. A card just wouldn't provide the same
service or use, although I do keep one locally in case Google burns down.
Hello, AJL.
On 02.04.2025 15:26 you wrote:
I pay Google 2 bucks/mo US for 1GB. Not a big $$$ deal for me. YMMV. I use it for off site
backup (like if the house burns down) and it is also conveniently available to any of my
devices pretty much anywhere if wanted or needed. A card just wouldn't provide the same
service or use, although I do keep one locally in case Google burns down.
I pay Yandex here less than $1 per month
for 2 Tb. Feel the difference ;)
In fact, I'm paying $3,7 for 10 Tb S3 object storage and full unlimited photo and video storage (which I don't use), and $0,3 for each subsequent terabyte.
On the other hand, I have to connect part of this storage to my VDS, where I am provided with only 30 GB (crying ;). However, it is completely free.
All this is happening in "impoverished" Russia, where the cost per square meter of housing is more expensive than New York and a little cheaper than Tokyo.
--
WBR, ON
AJL <[email protected]> wrote:
The point was that Apple & Google don't put the sd card slot in phones for >>>a reason, which is NOT that they want to give you the best phone possible. >>Guess you missed my point (and fact). Unlike Apple iOS devices the vast vast >> majority of Android phones (and tablets etc) that run Google accounts and >> apps are NOT made by Google and thus Google has no say over whether the
device has a slot or not. That is the *individual manufacturers* choice...
Thanks for the clarification which I agree with you I had missed the point.
There are 1,936 Android models (2020 to present), with a standard sd slot. >https://www.gsmarena.com/results.php3?nYearMin=2020&sAvailabilities=1,2&idCardslot=1
There are 986 Android models (2020 to present), without a standard sd slot. >https://www.gsmarena.com/search.php3?nYearMin=2020&sAvailabilities=1,2&idOS=2&idCardslot=1
Out of 2,922 recent Androids in use today, 1/3rd have a standard slot.
The biggest Android seller is Samsung, which outsold the iPhone every
quarter for the past few years (except for a single quarter last year).
So let's look at Samsung phones for the percentage that have the sdslot.
There are 134 Samsung models with that industry standard sd slot. >https://www.gsmarena.com/search.php3?nYearMin=2020&sMakers=9&sAvailabilities=1,2&idOS=2&idCardslot=1
Compared to 44 Samsung models without the industry standard sd slot. >https://www.gsmarena.com/search.php3?nYearMin=2020&sMakers=9&sAvailabilities=1,2&idOS=2&idCardslot=3
Out of 178 recent Samsung models still in use today, 75% have the sd slot.
We know Apple's strategy is to fleece the customer so it's zero percent.
But what about Google whose strategy is also to fleece the customer?
Just as with Apple, there are 0 Google phones with the standard sd slot. >https://www.gsmarena.com/search.php3?nYearMin=2020&sMakers=107&sAvailabilities=1,2&idOS=2&idCardslot=1
So my statements remain backed up that Google & Apple don't provide what
over three quarters of Samsung phones provide, and Samsung is clearly the >best seller on the market bar none (Apple iPhones don't even come close).
I wonder if people buy Samsungs because they don't have the strategy of >fleecing them by removing hardware so that the consumer has to buy it back?
AJL <[email protected]> wrote:
So my statements remain backed up that Google & Apple don't provide what >>>over three quarters of Samsung phones provide, and Samsung is clearly the >>>best seller on the market bar none (Apple iPhones don't even come close).
I guess it's how one reads your original statement. When one compares Apple >> and Google phones I think most folks think Android phones with Google
installed. But you are correct if you mean only Google Pixel phones. I
guess what threw me off is that would leave out the majority of the
non-Apple market, many with no slots. Shouldn't they have required some of >> your wrath too?
I'm glad you clarified and I apologize for not fully understanding you.
I think we're both communicating well now, given how conversations go.
When you said 'Google', I didn't realize you had maybe meant 'Android'.
When I think of a "Google phone", I think of the Pixel model only.
But you were apparently thinking of Google's Android OS - which is fine.
The beauty of Android is if you *want* the sdcard slot, you can get it.
Most Android's sold are Samsung & 75% of the Samsung models have the slot.
Maybe that's why most Android's sold are Samsungs in the first place. :)
I wonder if people buy Samsungs because they don't have the strategy of >>>fleecing them by removing hardware so that the consumer has to buy it back? >>I bought my Samsung phone over 5 years ago and I can't remember what my
reasons were for buying it over other brands. But I can tell you it is
still a virgin. I've never had any need to stick anything in it's slot...
If you don't need the memory, the slot doesn't help or hurt you.
But if you need the memory, NOT having the slot hurts you a lot.
Fundamentally, everything else being equal, a phone without the slot is >clearly a substandard phone to one that has the slot. That's pure logic.
I'm use to people making the argument that a worse phone is better.
But they don't know anything about basic logic since that makes no sense.
A phone with the slot, everything else being equal, can not only do >EVERYTHING that the phone without the slot can do, but it can do more.
And what it can do no phone on the planet without a slot can hope to do. >That's worth a lot when you need it; and it's worth nothing if you don't.
When I think of a "Google phone", I think of the Pixel model only.
But you were apparently thinking of Google's Android OS - which is fine.
When an Android phone won't operate unless it's signed into Google it's not
hard to think of it as a Google phone. I think many folks think that way
and perhaps that's why I've never heard a Pixel owner refer to his phone a
Google phone. Have you?
If you don't need the memory, the slot doesn't help or hurt you.
But if you need the memory, NOT having the slot hurts you a lot.
Yup. And the market has lots of phone choices for you slot needing folks.
Fundamentally, everything else being equal, a phone without the slot is >>clearly a substandard phone to one that has the slot. That's pure logic.
Not so much. It depends on the need of the customer. I have an iPhone user
in my house that's been using for decades and no slot complaints. Fact is
I'm not sure she would even know what we're talking about.
I'm use to people making the argument that a worse phone is better.
But they don't know anything about basic logic since that makes no sense.
A phone with the slot, everything else being equal, can not only do >>EVERYTHING that the phone without the slot can do, but it can do more.
Yup. It can also collect dust and crud. Same with the USB port I never use
(wireless charging).
Hopefully my next phone will be hole free.
And what it can do no phone on the planet without a slot can hope to do. >>That's worth a lot when you need it; and it's worth nothing if you don't.
As I said, 5+ years with no need of the holes on my phone. I suppose some
will bitch when the power plug leaves too. Being modern I use my phone
wirelessly, both charging and data. But as always the market will decide...
AJL
But now you're claiming you have to log into Google for Android to work? >Where did you get the idea that you have to sign into Google?
Since you're a developer,
you're well aware signing into Google is no more
necessary than signing into your bank account or signing into Samsung.
My main point of contention is simply that a phone without the slot is an >inferior phone to one with the slot, all things being equal otherwise.
That over 75% of Samsung phones have the industry-standard slot tells you >that the leading Android maker considers that sdslot important to people.
Hopefully my next phone will be hole free.
I'm sure that Google & Apple appreciate that everything costs you hundreds
of dollars more than it does for people who use the holes on the phone.
USB port (you have to pay more to compensate for its loss)
Aux jack (you have to pay more to compensate for its loss)
card slot (you have to pay more to compensate for its loss)
The market doesn't really decide. Otherwise we'd have no laws against >companies forcing the companies to do what they have to do, by law.
Google & Apple aren't stupid. They know this. It's part of their strategy. >They prey on people saying "oh, it's just a few hundred dollars" every day.
But now you're claiming you have to log into Google for Android to work? >>Where did you get the idea that you have to sign into Google?
Most all of my Android devices have been that way.
Since you're a developer,
I'm not a developer.
you're well aware signing into Google is no more
necessary than signing into your bank account or signing into Samsung.
My bank account does require signing in.
My main point of contention is simply that a phone without the slot is an >>inferior phone to one with the slot, all things being equal otherwise.
Kinda like a car is inferior to a pickup because it doesn't have the extra
storage capacity?
That over 75% of Samsung phones have the industry-standard slot tells you >>that the leading Android maker considers that sdslot important to people.
Only if they keep selling. The market will eventually decide as it always
does.
USB port (you have to pay more to compensate for its loss)
Aux jack (you have to pay more to compensate for its loss)
card slot (you have to pay more to compensate for its loss)
Just the opposite. Less manufacturing cost leads to less retail cost.
The market doesn't really decide. Otherwise we'd have no laws against >>companies forcing the companies to do what they have to do, by law.
Course the market decides. Many (most?) folks shop by price. Phones that
don't sell are cancelled. And when those few who actually shop for holes
dwindle, no more holey phones either... 8-O
Google & Apple aren't stupid. They know this. It's part of their strategy. >>They prey on people saying "oh, it's just a few hundred dollars" every day.
Not me. Google gets my $2 US/mo online storage and that's it. I don't see
that changing anytime soon since I'm not in the market for any Pixels. And
thanks Google for all those free services I use every day...
AJL <[email protected]> wrote:
We really can't go further...
We really can't go further...
I finally agree with you.
I always chuckle over pennies per month comparisons. Are folks really that broke??
All I need is 70GB so having 100GB or 100TB would make no difference to me. YMMV.
Another advantage for me is that since I am assimilated into the Google Universe my off site
Google storage shows up in the local drives of my Chrome devices. Likewise in the Google Drive
app in my Android devices. No browser needed...
AJL wrote:
I always chuckle over pennies per month comparisons. Are folks really that broke??
Why pay more when you can pay less? You are NOT a rich man ;)
The rich don't pay at all.
All I need is 70GB so having 100GB or 100TB would make no difference to me. YMMV.
70 GB is the level of free services.
Another advantage for me is that since I am assimilated into the Google Universe my off site Google storage shows up in the local drives of my Chrome devices. Likewise in the Google Drive app in my Android devices. No browser needed...
does anyone else use browsers for this?
You are telling me this as an achievement on a universal scale, it has long been commonplace.
Rich or poor I don't waste time over pennies a month. I actually sometimes treat myself to an
extra soda a day. And that often comes to (gasp) 100 times/month $$$ more than my horribly
expensive Google Drive does... 8-O
Course they do. They just don't worry about a few $100s a month.
Oh darn I have 70.5GB.
I did before abandoning that nasty Windows. Not anymore. I'm Freeeeeeeee...
Hello, AJL.
On 14.04.2025 15:27 you wrote:
Rich or poor I don't waste time over pennies a month. I actually sometimes treat myself to an
extra soda a day. And that often comes to (gasp) 100 times/month $$$ more than my horribly
expensive Google Drive does... 8-O
I eat a lot more, but I won't pay more for anything that costs less ;) habit..
Course they do. They just don't worry about a few $100s a month.
No. We don't really pay ;)
We say "a penny saves a ruble." That $100 for every little thing every day is $200-500k per year. I'll find a nicer place for them to invest.
Oh darn I have 70.5GB.
It doesn't matter if it's 100 Gb.
I did before abandoning that nasty Windows. Not anymore. I'm Freeeeeeeee...
I haven't been friends with Microsoft for 20 years already ;)
And I don't have a computer ;)
--
WBR, ON
$100/day is a bit different than $2/month to me. YMMV.
I was being snarky. For my limited use I wouldn't change online drives if I could get
100000000GB free.
Depends on your definition of a computer I suppose. It appears that you're using a computing
device (computer) to post here...
Hello, AJL.
On 14.04.2025 17:55 you wrote:
$100/day is a bit different than $2/month to me. YMMV.
it depends on what they are spent on ;)
I was being snarky. For my limited use I wouldn't change online drives if I could get
100000000GB free.
So mine are online, including the operating system.
Depends on your definition of a computer I suppose. It appears that you're using a computing
device (computer) to post here...
to write here, I use a smartphone, a phablet etc..
I haven't had a computer as such in the usual sense for 15-18 years.
And that doesn't stop me from programming
and disassembling in any way.
--
WBR, ON
I sometimes post using my smartphone when out and killing time waiting for the family shopper,
but that small screen is difficult on these old thumbs. At home I mostly post with this Amazon
Fire tablet but sometimes I splurge and break out a Chromebook.
Me neither unless laptops and count.
Me neither. I used to have to get all my programming from the old paper TV Guide but nowadays
it's all online...
Hello, AJL.
On 14.04.2025 20:07 you wrote:
I sometimes post using my smartphone when out and killing time waiting for the family shopper,
but that small screen is difficult on these old thumbs. At home I mostly post with this Amazon
Fire tablet but sometimes I splurge and break out a Chromebook.
I use my phone to talk on the phone, not my smartphone.
A 7-inch phablet smartphone with a 16:9 aspect ratio is convenient enough to put it in your pocket and write or read without strain.
In fact, it doesn't really matter if it's a 13" tablet or a 6.8" smartphone.
Me neither unless laptops and count.
I accidentally found the laptop in the garage in the fall. Now it's a nostalgia platform with debian and slackware ;)
Me neither. I used to have to get all my programming from the old paper TV Guide but nowadays
it's all online...
Creating android apps is just a hobby
--
WBR, ON
Do you mean a home phone or perhaps a non-smart cellphone? I think these days most folks call
their smartphone just a 'phone'. I usually do. I guess I just copied your (now snipped)
'smartphone' use in your earlier post.
a 7 incher would be a bit big for my shirt pocket which is where I often carry my phone. My
Galaxy S10+ at 6.4 inches just barely fits.
Does to me. I much prefer posting using this 10 inch Amazon tablet. But as I said earlier, if
I'm trapped out waiting for you know who shopping I can suffer through some posting using my
phone. But as always YMMV...
Hello, AJL.
On 17.04.2025 16:19 you wrote:
Do you mean a home phone or perhaps a non-smart cellphone? I think these days most folks call
their smartphone just a 'phone'. I usually do. I guess I just copied your (now snipped)
'smartphone' use in your earlier post.
Non-smart of course. I love them. You can charge it once a month and not think about whether you have enough charge for a day. There are also those where there is no main consumer - the screen ;)
a 7 incher would be a bit big for my shirt pocket which is where I often carry my phone. My
Galaxy S10+ at 6.4 inches just barely fits.
The format is also important. 16:9 is not the same as 26:8 ;)
I usually carry it in the back pocket of my jeans or in the breast pocket. Mass also matters. Up to 200 grams is normal.
Does to me. I much prefer posting using this 10 inch Amazon tablet.
But as I said earlier, if
I'm trapped out waiting for you know who shopping I can suffer through some posting using my
phone. But as always YMMV...
Habits.. Once upon a time, about 15 years ago, I couldn't figure out how and where to use the tablet. I can't live without him now ;)
--
WBR, ON
Ah. Been decades since I had one of those. I never have to worry about having enough charge
the next day. I just lay this (smart)phone on the wireless charger every night and start out
the next day at 100%. They say that's bad for the battery but I've got 5+ years on it now and
so far no problems (knocks on wood)...
Speak of the devil. I'm posting this from a Safeway grocery store...
Me neither. My problem is which one. I have several (toys)...
Hello, AJL.
On 17.04.2025 20:18 you wrote:
Ah. Been decades since I had one of those. I never have to worry about having enough charge
the next day. I just lay this (smart)phone on the wireless charger every night and start out
the next day at 100%. They say that's bad for the battery but I've got 5+ years on it now and
so far no problems (knocks on wood)...
No, it's not that kind of phone at all. You probably can't remember them because you're young ;)
I really don't charge my phone once a day or once a week. At best, once every three weeks for half an hour. It holds a guaranteed charge for a month, in active conversational mode.
Nothing "smart", just a device for mobile phone voice communication.
Speak of the devil. I'm posting this from a Safeway grocery store...
The devil is in the details ;)
Me neither. My problem is which one. I have several (toys)...
I have no problems, I see no obstacles ;)
--
WBR, ON
Comes out the same I think. My phone's been active 24/7 for over 5 years now. It lays fully
active next to the bed on the wireless charger every night and I start out the next day at
100%. So we both have full use of our phones months (month for you?) without worrying about
the charge.
And my (smart)phone does have some advantages. For example I got a $100 US check in the mail
yesterday and used my phone to deposit it. Very handy, no trip needed to the bank. But then
virtually everybody here carries smartphones, likely for the advantages over the bad old days.
Not there?
Hello, AJL.
On 19.04.2025 21:04 you wrote:
Comes out the same I think. My phone's been active 24/7 for over 5 years now. It lays fully
active next to the bed on the wireless charger every night and I start out the next day at
100%. So we both have full use of our phones months (month for you?) without worrying about
the charge.
I'm often in the fields. Where sockets and electrical lines were not delivered. And I really don't like carrying around too much,
and even more so keeping radio-emitting devices near my body,
especially at night. Where ive fell down and fell asleep, without thinking that im needed to charge some kind of phone. The phone should not consume such an amount of energy a priori.
And my (smart)phone does have some advantages. For example I got a $100 US check in the mail
yesterday and used my phone to deposit it. Very handy, no trip needed to the bank. But then
virtually everybody here carries smartphones, likely for the advantages over the bad old days.
Not there?
I was lucky enough to be born and spend my childhood, youth and part of my adulthood WITHOUT mobile phones at all. You need to communicate eye to eye, and meet more often.
--
WBR, ON
I got my ham ticket in 1957 and have been radiated by various radio toys ever since. I ran a
homebrew 1000 watt HF mobile rig for awhile. The antenna was 5 feet from the drivers seat. Bet
that cooked up a few of my cells. So it's probably a little late for radiation paranoia for
me...
Hello, AJL.
On 20.04.2025 04:00 you wrote:
I got my ham ticket in 1957 and have been radiated by various radio toys ever since. I ran a
homebrew 1000 watt HF mobile rig for awhile. The antenna was 5 feet from the drivers seat. Bet
that cooked up a few of my cells. So it's probably a little late for radiation paranoia for
me...
It's visible ;)
very noticeable.
Yes, it's time to get used to the soil ;)
--
WBR, ON
Nope. What you see is from not wearing sunscreen, not radio poisoning.
Gosh, things were going just great and now you have to go and make a dirty remark...
Hello, AJL.
On 20.04.2025 16:09 you wrote:
Nope. What you see is from not wearing sunscreen, not radio poisoning.
I don't wear creams ;)
I don't feel very good in my sleep when I know that someone wants to talk to me.
The so-called "telephone law" - no, I am strongly against it. If you want to talk, come over. If you can't, write. And we'll discuss when we can talk on the phone. But not like that, calling without asking. Some people actually call at night.
And a phone with only a phone function - yes, I really like it. I also use smartphones, but I don't like to talk on shovel.
Gosh, things were going just great and now you have to go and make a dirty remark...
What do you know about dirt?? It's just a joke ;)
Sorry, maybe I was too harsh.
--
WBR, ON
On 4/20/25 11:12 AM, Oleg Nazaroff wrote: It's an emergency call thing with me. I have 50+
close relatives (kids, grand and great-grandkids) locally and spread around the USA. Any calls
I get overnight would likely be a problem so I need to leave the phone on.
So was mine a joke. A play on words... Likely lost in translation?
simple as English ;)So was mine a joke. A play on words... Likely lost in translation?
Maybe, I don't always think in English. But it's said imho as intended. Maybe it only sounds dirty in certain areas where I haven't lived. It is not so easy to remember absolutely all the "features of national communication", even in a language as
--
WBR, ON
My metro area (pop 2m) is over 40% Hispanic. I once tried to learn Spanish to help in an
earlier life as a street cop but failed. So I have great respect for you multi-speakers...
Hello, AJL.
On 21.04.2025 17:28 you wrote:
My metro area (pop 2m) is over 40% Hispanic. I once tried to learn Spanish to help in an
earlier life as a street cop but failed. So I have great respect for you multi-speakers...
I was forced by work/service, and only then did my own interest arise, and as a result, I speak nine languages, some of which are very rare, and understand the related ones quite well.themselves and difficulties arose - they needed proof that their first words were foreign, and meaningful and correct. Fortunately, I recorded a lot of videos ;)
Children born and raised in a Russian-speaking environment began to speak different languages, foreign ones. Perhaps because Dad sometimes spoke to someone else in foreign languages. But when the children grew up, they began to learn languages
--
WBR, ON
I suppose learning a language is like learning to play the piano. Some pick it up easier and
quicker than others. YMMV fits well here. In the future if I ever need to speak to a
non-English speaker I'll just get an Android interpreter app and let my phone do the talking.
Easy-Peasy. And bingo that also brings us back on topic...
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 715 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 153:05:09 |
| Calls: | 12,091 |
| Calls today: | 4 |
| Files: | 15,000 |
| Messages: | 6,517,664 |