XPost: comp.mobile.ipad, comp.sys.mac.advocacy, comp.sys.mac.apps   
   XPost: uk.telecom.mobile   
   From: arlen.george.holder@is.invalid   
      
   On Fri, 14 Feb 2020 11:00:50 GMT, Richard L. Hamilton wrote:   
      
   > A lot of your rant is IMO malicious interpretation.   
      
   Facts are the weakness of all you apologists (proven below with facts).   
      
   I _love_ facts so if you can provide facts backing up your claims, that   
   would be the adult thing to do, and which would be very much appreciated.   
      
   You'll note that adults provide cites and in those cites are facts.   
      
   You've shown facts are your weakness, as they are for all apologists.   
   o You gravitate to MARKETING messages because you don't comprehend facts.   
      
   Proof below.   
      
   > Show me that they   
   > were throttliing CPUs on iPhones with perfectly healthy batteries - I   
   > doubt you can.   
      
   Please do not fabricate a strawman just so that you can shoot it down.   
   o If you can't address facts, then simply do not post imagined objections.   
      
   I don't think ANYONE said Apple was throttling brand new phones whose   
   batteries were working fine (certainly not me).   
      
   Remember, I'm the guy who first broke this news to this newsgroup (on   
   12/20/2017); they _found_ the throttling because benchmarks plummeted the   
   instant people installed the iOS release that implemented the _secret_   
   throttling.   
   o Report says Apple 'Powerd' code secretly slows your iOS device down to trick   
   you into buying a new device   
      
      
   Not only did benchmarks plummet drastically, but that CPU drop was   
   permanent (i.e., batteries never get better).   
      
   Not only was that benchmark plummet permanent, but when people did put new   
   batteries in, the benchmarks _doubled_ instantly.   
      
   > (Nobody supports old hardware forever; they manage 4-5   
   > years usually, which is tolerable.   
      
   Again, please do not fabricate a strawman just so you can shoot it down.   
      
   These iPhones were secretly throttled after about a year.   
      
   If the only way you can deal with facts is to fabricate imaginary windmills   
   for you to then swing at, then all you're really doing is telling us you   
   have no adult response to the facts (which means you agree with them).   
      
   > But that doesn't make special   
   > handling of older hardware a conspiracy to get rid of it.)   
      
   Apple was convicted of the crime of intentionally shortening the life of   
   the affected iPhones.   
      
   Apple likely has some of the best lawyers on the planet, and _they_ had to   
   write up the public note which is on Apple's web page today saying they   
   admit to committing the crime.   
      
   For you to call a crime "special handling" is, indeed, paradoxical.   
   o Apple committed the crime of deceptive commercial practice   
      
      
   > Given a   
   > choice between full speed and greater risk of crashing that might   
   > exist with a worn battery, I think not crashing is a better choice.   
      
   This statement shows that you're just fine with the choice of:   
   a. Unacceptable performance, or,   
   b. Unacceptable stability.   
   (You MUST pick one!)   
      
   And remember, it was _secret_, so your only choice was:   
   a. Unacceptable performance, or,   
   B. Buy a new phone.   
   (Even the Apple Genius bar was telling customers to do this.)   
      
   We already proved no other smartphone OEM does what Apple does!   
   o Does any Android phone manufacturer pull the hostile battery & display   
   lockout stunts that Apple secretly added to the iPhones recently?   
      
      
   HINT: It's not the batteries; it's clearly crappy overall power design.   
      
   > All that throwing a hissy got was disclosure and a switch so you can   
   > choose yourself - the latter always good, but hardly obligatory, IMO.   
      
   You actually think it's good that your only iPhone choices are now:   
   a. Unacceptable performance, or   
   b. Unacceptable stability, or,   
   c. Unacceptable repeated expensive battery replacements.   
   (You MUST choose one, and repeatedly, for the life of the iPhone!)   
      
   > Everyone (Apple, Google, Amazon) with voice activated AIs listens some   
   > to improve both speech-to-text and understanding of questions.   
      
   This is a classic response of blaming everyone but Apple for Apple flaws.   
      
   Even Apple does it!   
   o Apple constantly & consistently blames everyone else but Apple for Apple   
   bugs & Apple design flaws!   
      
      
   It's always you apologists who blame everyone for Apple's flaws.   
      
   What you apologists forget is that old adage of having your cake and eating   
   it also.   
      
   The _adult_ response should be, IMHO, along the lines of Apple shouldn't   
   throw stones at Google when Apple's privacy is as bad, or worse.   
      
   You apologists _never_ seem to own the adult comprehensive skills that can   
   comprehend that Apple is the one advertising privacy.   
      
   And, you apologists never seem to comprehend that Apple is the one   
   violating your privacy (and their own privacy policies).   
      
   Don't blame Apple's actions on Google or Amazon please.   
   o Children don't take responsibility for their actions.   
      
   Apple is responsible for violating your privacy, and for violating their   
   own policies on privacy.   
      
   Deal with that fact like an adult instead of playing the classic apologist   
   child-like game of blaming everyone else but Apple for Apple's flaws.   
   o Why do both Apple & the apologists habitually blame everyone but Apple for   
   Apple's poor design choices?   
      
      
   > If you are crazy about privacy, you have to live in an off-grid shack   
   > like the Unabomber did; otherwise, be careful but don't expect wonders   
   > from anyone.   
      
   This is the first sensible statement showing that you are capable of adult   
   cognitive skills.   
      
   There is no privacy on any consumer phone, where privacy is a long chaing   
   of links, and Apple only touts the very few very strong ones.   
   o What is the factual truth about PRIVACY differences or similarities between   
   the Android & iOS mobile phone ecosystems?   
      
      
   > Apple will CYA and sometimes release on marketing   
   > schedule rather than on ready like anyone else; but the basic premise   
   > remains: your data is not what they sell (unlike Google) nor used for   
   > marketing what they do sell both directly and for 3rd parties (unlike   
   > Amazon).   
      
   That's only _one_ of the hundreds of links of privacy.   
   o You skipped very many links that Apple is _less_ private!   
      
   Factual proof by the scores is in this thread:   
   o What is the factual truth about PRIVACY differences or similarities between   
   the Android & iOS mobile phone ecosystems?   
      
      
   Although, I can tell you're an apologist so you're _immune_ to facts.   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)