Wolf comments on Poll: Which abandoned Android phone features do you miss the most?

[–] Wolf@lemmy.today 3 points 1 year ago (13 children)

You know its a really easy to prove against, right?

Why would I need to prove it? You didn't read any of the articles I linked to did you? The fact that they have the ability to do this is not even a question. The government admitted that it was able to do this all the way back in 2006.

Just have some basic radio spectrograph to detect any signals coming from a turned off phone.

The claim isn't that the FBI/NSA/CIA/ICE whoever is doing this constantly to everybody, it's that they have the capability to do this to anybody, which again isn't even a question. I'm not really worried about being spied on personally (yet) and even if I were I'd just leave my phone at home or put it in a Faraday bag, I'm not going to carry around a 'basic radio spectrograph' and whip it out every time I want to have a private conversation.

In reality, the correlation is phones continue to get thinner

Lol, that's like saying I lost weight because I bought smaller pants. Yeah, designers are able to make phones thinner when they are able to design around non-replaceable batteries. Was anyone asking for thinner phones? They had the ability to make thinner phones by disallowing replaceable batteries for a decade and did not.

Were consumers demanding that phone manufactures make phones worse by removing useful features like replaceable batteries or headphone jacks- or was these anti-features foisted upon us?

If it had been just some manufactures that switched, or if those manufacturers that did switch had offered the option of different models, some with replaceable batteries and some without, and then consumers chose the worse phones- I might not be as convinced.

As it is now with 99.9% of all phones you can buy not even giving you the option, I'm not buying it.

It's not like this is some crazy off the wall theory. I'm not saying the Earth is flat or we didn't land on the moon. We know that the government is using our cell phones to track us, we know they have the capabilities to do so. The only question is did governments (I guarantee it's not just the U.S) make deals with/ask/or put pressure on manufactures to incentivize the switch. That's not really far fetched at all.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 13 child comments

[–] piccolo@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 year ago (12 children)

Was anyone asking for thinner phones? They had the ability to make thinner phones by disallowing replaceable batteries for a decade and did not.

A. They did not have the ability because doing so would reduced battery capacity because the tech is battery still maturing.

B. Apparently people are asking because people are still buying. Just because me and you arent asking doesnt mean the greater market isnt.

As it is now with 99.9% of all phones you can buy not even giving you the option, I'm not buying it.

A. That would mean the entire world is in on the conspiracy.

B. I cant buy a small truck in america. Does that mean there is a grand conspiracy?

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 12 child comments

[–] Wolf@lemmy.today 1 point 1 year ago (11 children)

A. They did not have the ability because doing so would reduced battery capacity because the tech is battery still maturing.

That makes zero sense. How the phone is connected to the battery has no bearing on capacity.

B. Apparently people are asking because people are still buying. Just because me and you arent asking doesnt mean the greater market isnt.

That's silly. They removed the ability, they didn't give people a choice. No one was asking, no one chose this.

A. That would mean the entire world is in on the conspiracy.

How would it mean that? The U.S. is a Huge market, China is a huge market It would only take one or two. Plus countries all around the world spy on their own citizens, so it 'benefits' their governments even if they weren't directly responsible. Did you know that in the U.S. Texas makes all of our school textbooks worse because it's easier just to print the stupid textbooks than print separate ones for just Texas because Texas is such a big market. This is not a conspiracy theory, you can look it up if you are interested.

B. I cant buy a small truck in america.

You can buy small trucks in America. What are you talking about?

Does that mean there is a grand conspiracy?

You are the one that keeps calling this a 'grand conspiracy'. There are only a handful of phone manufactures, it wouldn't be that difficult to get them all to agree to something, especially if they were rewarded in some way for it. Corporations only care about money.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 11 child comments

[–] piccolo@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 year ago (10 children)

thinner phone requires a smaller battery. Smaller battery is smaller capacity.

That's silly. They removed the ability, they didn't give people a choice. No one was asking, no one chose this.

Noone asked for phones to copy the iphone... yet here we are.

Did you know that in the U.S. Texas makes all of our school textbooks worse because it's easier just to print the stupid textbooks than print separate ones for just Texas because Texas is such a big market. This is not a conspiracy theory, you can look it up if you are interested.

So close to getting it... smh

You can buy small trucks in America. What are you talking about?

You can? Show one new model that is the same size of a 1990 ford ranger.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 10 child comments

[–] Wolf@lemmy.today 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (9 children)

thinner phone requires a smaller battery. Smaller battery is smaller capacity.

Yes, smaller batteries of the same type generally have lower capacity. Very good. That's not what we were talking about though is it? YOU said that having a non-replaceable battery allowed them to make phones thinner. That is what they had the ability to do for the decade that they were still making phones with replaceable batteries.

Noone asked for phones to copy the iphone

Peter Noone, from Hermans Hermits? Fun trivia. You know who else asked for it, everyone else.

So close to getting it…

Oh, you think you are close to getting it? Well maybe I can help you the rest of the way. If School Text Book manufacturers who were forced to come up with a dumber version of their product to fit the requirements of one large market found it was cheaper just to sell everyone the dumb version instead of making two different versions, it follows that Phone Manufacturers would likewise find it cheaper to sell the dumber version of phones to everyone if one large market required them to make phones dumber. Do you get it now? I can try to dumb it down even more for you if you need me to.

Show one new model that is the same size of a 1990 ford ranger.

The still sell Ford Rangers I'm pretty sure. I'm going to let you do your own Truck shopping.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 9 child comments

[–] piccolo@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 year ago* (8 children)

I said smaller battery and connecters allowed for thinner phones.

And mass production is cheaper than low production. So if all phones are designed the same, then the factories can be tooled all the same accross all models.

People actually did like the form factor and function of iPhones, false equivalency much?

So why are you confused manufacturers are copying Apple?

I'm not going to do your Truck shopping for you. If you can't figure that out on your own, ask your parents.

But you said they exist... it should be easy. Unless... you were talking out of your ass again.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 8 child comments

[–] Wolf@lemmy.today 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (7 children)

I said smaller battery and connecters allowed for thinner phones.

Just making the batteries non replaceable makes them able to be thinner, and they always had that ability. They also had the ability to put in smaller batteries if everyone was clamoring for super thin phones. They just weren't.

And mass production is cheaper than low production.

True

So if all phones are designed the same, then the factories can be tooled all the same accross all models.

Uh, no. That would only be true if all models of phone from the same factory were made exactly the same way with the exact same machines. That's not the case. They make different models of phone. They could easily make one model with a user replaceable battery and a different model without one.

But you said they exist… it should be easy. Unless… you were talking out of your ass again.

They do exist, and it was super easy. They still make Ford Rangers. Try google, it's the first thing that pops up when you type in New Ford Ranger. I guess you were talking out your ass again.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 7 child comments

[–] piccolo@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 year ago* (6 children)

The new ranger is just a tiny bit smaller than the f150 It absolutely is not the same or even close to the size of ranger 20 years ago.

The closest in size "truck" to the old ranger is the maverick... but thats a unibody UTE, hardly comparable.

Uh, no. That would only be true if all models of phone from the same factory were made exactly the same way with the exact same machines. That's not the case. They make different models of phone. They could easily make one model with a user replaceable battery and a different model without one.

Sure... if there was enough demand for replaceable batteries... but there is not. Basically the vast market is content with the cheaper option.

That's a BINGO! So if that's true, then they absolutely had the ability to do that for the first decade of smart phones.

Again... smaller battery smaller capacity... a battery of the same physical size 15 years ago was much less enegry dense.

Its ok. You can be wrong. Just learn from the experience.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 6 child comments

[–] Wolf@lemmy.today 1 point 1 year ago (5 children)

The new ranger is just a tiny bit smaller than the f150 It absolutely is not the same or even close to the size of ranger 20 years ago.

You said you couldn't buy a small truck, not that you couldn't buy a truck the same size as 20 years ago.

Sure… if there was enough demand for replaceable batteries… but there is not. Basically the vast market is content with the cheaper option.

There was a demand, we weren't given a choice. I'm not sure how this so hard for you to grasp.

Again… smaller battery smaller capacity…

Again...Just making the batteries non replaceable makes them able to be thinner, and they always had that ability. They also had the ability to put in smaller batteries if everyone was clamoring for super thin phones. They just weren’t.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 5 child comments

[–] piccolo@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 year ago* (4 children)

You said you couldn't buy a small truck, not that you couldn't buy a truck the same size as 20 years ago.

A. I clarified to find me one of the same size as a 1990 model.

B. Isnt this exactly the same argument your making? There is huge demand for small trucks, the ranger was a top seller when it was discontinued. And when it was brought back, its a slightly smaller version of the f150, and nothing what people want.

They also had the ability to put in smaller batteries if everyone was clamoring for super thin phones. They just weren’t.

You really are that dense. The battery tech was not there to allow thinner phones without compromising capacity. The strongest market desirablity is battery life. But people also want smaller phones. Hell, futurama made this joke in 2001

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] Wolf@lemmy.today 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

A. I clarified to find me one of the same size as a 1990 model.

Good for you.

B. Isnt this exactly the same argument your making?

No, you don't carry Ford Rangers around in your pocket all the time making them easy vectors to spy on people.

The bagtery tech was not there to allow thinner phones without comprismising capacity.

And if people really gave a fuck about thinner phones they would have accepted smaller "bagtery's" to get them. Clearly capacity was more important. So I guess people weren't chomping at the bit to get thinner phones now were they?