From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

To add insult to injury on the ridiculous Apple FaceID gimmick (which is
needed because of Apple's absurd login requirements nobody else has)...

<https://9to5mac.com/2026/09/23/apple-iphone-18-pro-rebooting-bug-software-update-fix/>

Further evidence Apple has never in its history ever fully tested anything.

Given FaceID is a gimmick that is "needed" only on iPhones, I think it's
kind of poetic that Apple has never even once fully tested their own
security software.

Don't you?
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On 2026-09-24 07:03, Maria Sophia wrote:

To add insult to injury on the ridiculous Apple FaceID gimmick (which is needed because of Apple's absurd login requirements nobody else has)...

<https://9to5mac.com/2026/09/23/apple-iphone-18-pro-rebooting-bug-software-update-fix/>

Further evidence Apple has never in its history ever fully tested anything.

Given FaceID is a gimmick that is "needed" only on iPhones, I think it's
kind of poetic that Apple has never even once fully tested their own
security software.

Don't you?

You talk such amazing and complete bullshit, don't you, Arlen?
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On Sep 24, 2026 at 7:03:06rC>AM MST, "Maria Sophia" wrote <1193aiq$v1s$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>:

To add insult to injury on the ridiculous Apple FaceID gimmick (which is needed because of Apple's absurd login requirements nobody else has)...

<https://9to5mac.com/2026/09/23/apple-iphone-18-pro-rebooting-bug-software-update-fix/>

Further evidence Apple has never in its history ever fully tested anything.

What do you think has been FULLY tested?

Given FaceID is a gimmick that is "needed" only on iPhones, I think it's
kind of poetic that Apple has never even once fully tested their own
security software.

Don't you?

Tell us you do not see the value of FaceID without telling us you do not see the value of FaceID.

I have it and LOVE it. Did not realize how much better than fingerprint it would be until I had it. I mean it is not a must-have... but it certainly
makes things easier and better.
--
It's impossible for someone who is at war with themselves to be at peace with you.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On 9/24/26 3:45 PM, Alan wrote:

On 2026-09-24 07:03, Maria Sophia wrote:

To add insult to injury on the ridiculous Apple FaceID gimmick (which is
needed because of Apple's absurd login requirements nobody else has)...

<https://9to5mac.com/2026/09/23/apple-iphone-18-pro-rebooting-bug-
software-update-fix/>

Further evidence Apple has never in its history ever fully tested
anything.

Given FaceID is a gimmick that is "needed" only on iPhones, I think it's
kind of poetic that Apple has never even once fully tested their own
security software.

Don't you?

You talk such amazing and complete bullshit, don't you, Arlen?

You don't need Face ID on an iPhone. In fact, you can disable Face ID
and logon with a password.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On 2026-09-27 10:22, Tom Elam wrote:

On 9/24/26 3:45 PM, Alan wrote:

On 2026-09-24 07:03, Maria Sophia wrote:

To add insult to injury on the ridiculous Apple FaceID gimmick (which is >>> needed because of Apple's absurd login requirements nobody else has)...

<https://9to5mac.com/2026/09/23/apple-iphone-18-pro-rebooting-bug-
software-update-fix/>

Further evidence Apple has never in its history ever fully tested
anything.

Given FaceID is a gimmick that is "needed" only on iPhones, I think it's >>> kind of poetic that Apple has never even once fully tested their own
security software.

Don't you?

You talk such amazing and complete bullshit, don't you, Arlen?

You don't need Face ID on an iPhone. In fact, you can disable Face ID
and logon with a password.

Tell me more obvious things I already know, asshole.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On 2026-09-27 1:22 p.m., Tom Elam wrote:

On 9/24/26 3:45 PM, Alan wrote:

On 2026-09-24 07:03, Maria Sophia wrote:

To add insult to injury on the ridiculous Apple FaceID gimmick (which is >>> needed because of Apple's absurd login requirements nobody else has)...

<https://9to5mac.com/2026/09/23/apple-iphone-18-pro-rebooting-bug-
software-update-fix/>

Further evidence Apple has never in its history ever fully tested
anything.

Given FaceID is a gimmick that is "needed" only on iPhones, I think it's >>> kind of poetic that Apple has never even once fully tested their own
security software.

Don't you?

You talk such amazing and complete bullshit, don't you, Arlen?

You don't need Face ID on an iPhone. In fact, you can disable Face ID
and logon with a password.

I find Face ID to not only be convenient but incredibly accurate. It
makes it a lot less cumbersome to lock applications from people trying
to use my phone, like my son.
--
CrudeSausage
MacBook Air M4
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

CrudeSausage wrote:

You don't need Face ID on an iPhone. In fact, you can disable Face ID
and logon with a password.

I find Face ID to not only be convenient but incredibly accurate. It
makes it a lot less cumbersome to lock applications from people trying
to use my phone, like my son.

You do realize only Apple needs these idiotic biometric gimmicks, right?

Only Apple systems are designed so poorly that these gimmicks are needed.

Every other OS except Apple's toy operating systems, just work w/o it.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On 2026-09-27 21:25, Maria Sophia wrote:

CrudeSausage wrote:

You don't need Face ID on an iPhone. In fact, you can disable Face ID
and logon with a password.

I find Face ID to not only be convenient but incredibly accurate. It
makes it a lot less cumbersome to lock applications from people trying
to use my phone, like my son.

You do realize only Apple needs these idiotic biometric gimmicks, right?

Only Apple systems are designed so poorly that these gimmicks are

needed.

Every other OS except Apple's toy operating systems, just work w/o it.

<https://www.lifewire.com/android-face-recognition-setup-11805342>



--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On Sep 28, 2026, Maria Sophia wrote
(in article<119cq70$196v$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>):

CrudeSausage wrote:

You don't need Face ID on an iPhone. In fact, you can disable Face ID
and logon with a password.

I find Face ID to not only be convenient but incredibly accurate. It
makes it a lot less cumbersome to lock applications from people trying
to use my phone, like my son.

You do realize only Apple needs these idiotic biometric gimmicks, right?

Only Apple systems are designed so poorly that these gimmicks are needed.

Every other OS except Apple's toy operating systems, just work w/o it.

Hmm.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_10#System_security

https://www.samsung.com/us/support/answer/ANS10002519/

https://www.linuxtechmore.com/facial-authentication-on-linux

It would appear that Arlen is as full of shit on this as he usually is.

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On Sep 29, 2026 at 6:37:10rC>AM EDT, "WolfFan" <akwolffan@zoho.com> wrote:

On Sep 28, 2026, Maria Sophia wrote
(in article<119cq70$196v$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>):

CrudeSausage wrote:

You don't need Face ID on an iPhone. In fact, you can disable Face ID
and logon with a password.

I find Face ID to not only be convenient but incredibly accurate. It
makes it a lot less cumbersome to lock applications from people trying
to use my phone, like my son.

You do realize only Apple needs these idiotic biometric gimmicks, right?

Only Apple systems are designed so poorly that these gimmicks are needed.

Every other OS except Apple's toy operating systems, just work w/o it.

Hmm.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_10#System_security

https://www.samsung.com/us/support/answer/ANS10002519/

https://www.linuxtechmore.com/facial-authentication-on-linux

It would appear that Arlen is as full of shit on this as he usually is.

Was there ever any doubt? Arlen has a perfect 100% record of being wrong on every claim he makes here.

Because trolling is his entire life.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On 2026-09-29 9:38 a.m., Nick Charles wrote:

On Sep 29, 2026 at 6:37:10rC>AM EDT, "WolfFan" <akwolffan@zoho.com> wrote:

On Sep 28, 2026, Maria Sophia wrote
(in article<119cq70$196v$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>):

CrudeSausage wrote:

You don't need Face ID on an iPhone. In fact, you can disable Face ID >>>>> and logon with a password.

I find Face ID to not only be convenient but incredibly accurate. It
makes it a lot less cumbersome to lock applications from people trying >>>> to use my phone, like my son.

You do realize only Apple needs these idiotic biometric gimmicks, right? >>>
Only Apple systems are designed so poorly that these gimmicks are needed. >>>
Every other OS except Apple's toy operating systems, just work w/o it.

Hmm.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_10#System_security

https://www.samsung.com/us/support/answer/ANS10002519/

https://www.linuxtechmore.com/facial-authentication-on-linux

It would appear that Arlen is as full of shit on this as he usually is.

Was there ever any doubt? Arlen has a perfect 100% record of being wrong on every claim he makes here.

Because trolling is his entire life.

Is he as retarded as Snit?
--
CrudeSausage
MacBook Air M4
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

CrudeSausage wrote:

Is he as retarded as Snit?

Apple religious zealot nutcases have been trying to prove me wrong for
years and you've never even once found any facts from me to be wrong.

For example, this is Snit claiming that a megabit per second is a decibel.
*Snit video purportedly proving that a decibel is a megabitperseconde!*
<https://youtu.be/7QaABa6DFIo>
*It's a fact iOS devices can't even graph Wi-Fi signal strength over time*
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/PZuec56EWB0>
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/PZuec56EWB0>

The funny thing is Alan Baker agreed with Snit, as did Lewis & nospam.

You Apple religious nutcase zealots always defend your God to the death, no matter what, using the first inane idiocy that pops into your heads.

Not a single one of you religious zealots is aware that no other operating system won't let you load software without the mothership OEM account.

Just Apple.
Nobody else.

You have to log into the device so many times a day that people would be throwing iPhones off the next bridge if it didn't have that FaceID gimmick.

Only an Apple religious zealot nutcase would be unaware of that basic fact.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On 2026-09-29 08:32, Maria Sophia wrote:

CrudeSausage wrote:

Is he as retarded as Snit?

Apple religious zealot nutcases have been trying to prove me wrong for
years and you've never even once found any facts from me to be wrong.

For example, this is Snit claiming that a megabit per second is a decibel.
*Snit video purportedly proving that a decibel is a megabitperseconde!*
<https://youtu.be/7QaABa6DFIo>

Ummmmmm...nope!

*It's a fact iOS devices can't even graph Wi-Fi signal strength over time*

It's also a fact that almost no one cares.

<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/PZuec56EWB0>

"429 Too Many Requests"

<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/PZuec56EWB0>

"429 Too Many Requests"

The funny thing is Alan Baker agreed with Snit, as did Lewis & nospam.

Wrong.

You Apple religious nutcase zealots always defend your God to the death, no matter what, using the first inane idiocy that pops into your heads.

Not a single one of you religious zealots is aware that no other operating system won't let you load software without the mothership OEM account.

Just Apple.
Nobody else.

You have to log into the device so many times a day that people would be throwing iPhones off the next bridge if it didn't have that FaceID gimmick.

False. As usual.

Only an Apple religious zealot nutcase would be unaware of that basic fact.

I notice you've completely dropped out the text showing that Apple is
not requiring you to use FaceID...
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On Sep 29, 2026 at 8:32:10rC>AM MST, "Maria Sophia" wrote <119gllq$14tr$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>:

CrudeSausage wrote:

Is he as retarded as Snit?

Apple religious zealot nutcases have been trying to prove me wrong for
years and you've never even once found any facts from me to be wrong.

These facts got you to freak out. :)

1. https://www.getastra.com/blog/security-audit/malware-statistics/ -- Android devices are 50x more likely to be infected than iOS devices, showing the starkest difference in malware prevalence.

2. https://www.comparitech.com/blog/vpn-privacy/20-current-android-malware-stats/ -- Android malware attacks reached 33.3 million in 2024; iOS attacks remain very rare.

3. https://securelist.com/mobile-threat-report-2024/115494/ -- Android is the main target for mobile malware, with Trojan banker attacks up 196%; iOS sees far fewer infections.

4. https://46745145.fs1.hubspotusercontent-na1.net/hubfs/46745145/MAPS_MTD/REPORT/GEN/Global%20Mobile%20Threat%20Report%202024%20FINAL%20(1).pdf
-- Android's ecosystem is more broadly exposed to attacks than iOS.

5. https://www.kaspersky.com/resource-center/threats/android-vs-iphone-mobile-security
-- Android faces far higher malware volume; both require updates and safe practices.

6. https://www.qualysec.com/ios-vs-android-security/ -- iOS is more secure by default; Android needs careful management to match safety.

7. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/370667917_Comparative_Study_of_Information_Security_in_Mobile_Operating_Systems_Android_and_Apple_iOS
-- iOS has superior information security architecture versus Android.

8. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312279414_Security_Evaluation_of_IOS_and_Android/fulltext/587b977308ae4445c06422df/Security-Evaluation-of-IOS-and-Android.pdf
-- iOS offers better enterprise security; Android requires careful management.

9. https://www.renemayrhofer.com/courses/android-security/selected-paper/2023/Android_and_iOS_Platform_Security-A_Comparison.pdf
-- iOS shows stronger hardware and system-level security in 2023-2024.

10. https://www.approov.io/hubfs/White%20Paper/WP-Comparison%20of%20Apple%2C%20Android%20and%20Huawei%20Mobile%20App%20Security%20v1.0%20FINAL(2).pdf
-- iOS apps are more secure by default due to App Store restrictions.

11. https://www.getastra.com/blog/mobile/ios-vs-android-security/ -- iOS's controlled ecosystem reduces malware exposure; Android's openness increases
the attack surface.

12. https://www.corrata.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Mobile-Security-Whitepaper-Final-Nov-20112017.pdf
-- iOS is less susceptible to mass malware; Android's openness increases exposure.

13. https://www.lookout.com/threat-intelligence/report/q1-2024-mobile-landscape-threat-report
-- Enterprise spyware targets iOS even though Android dominates overall
malware volume.

14. https://www.lookout.com/threat-intelligence/report/q2-2024-mobile-landscape-threat-report
-- Mobile phishing and malicious web content are rising; iOS is increasingly targeted in enterprise.

15. https://www.helpnetsecurity.com/2024/12/26/mobile-devices-attacks/ -- iOS faced higher phishing exposure (18.4%) than Android (11.4%), despite Android's higher malware volume.

16. https://www.cybersecurity-insiders.com/vulnerability-comparison-android-vs-ios-in-the-face-of-cyber-attacks/
-- Android is more exposed to vulnerabilities, but iOS still faces targeted attacks.

17. https://arxiv.org/abs/2108.04754 -- Android devices are significantly more prone to persistent malware infections than iOS.

18. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2105.12613 -- iOS offers stronger protection against unauthorized access; Android needs extra management.

19. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2109.13722 -- Both OSes have privacy/data collection issues; Android apps are more likely to leak sensitive information.

20. https://petsymposium.org/popets/2024/popets-2024-0047.pdf -- iOS privacy labels are slightly more effective than Android in helping users understand data collection.

21. https://www.promon.io/security-news/android-vs-ios-security -- Security depends more on user behavior, patching, and configuration than OS alone.

22. https://www.norton.com/blog/mobile/android-vs-ios-which-is-more-secure -- iOS generally offers stronger default security; user behavior is the main risk on both platforms.

23. https://www.verizon.com/business/resources/Tc13/reports/2024-mobile-security-index.pdf
-- Android is riskier in enterprise without strong management; mobile devices remain key breach vectors.

24. https://lp.zimperium.com/hubfs/Reports/2025%20Global%20Mobile%20Threat%20Report.pdf
-- Sideloaded apps and older Android devices greatly increase enterprise risk; iOS risk comes mostly from targeted attacks.

For example, this is Snit claiming that a megabit per second is a decibel.

I never said, suggested, hinted, or implied that.

*Snit video purportedly proving that a decibel is a megabitperseconde!*
<https://youtu.be/7QaABa6DFIo>

That claim is not made there.

*It's a fact iOS devices can't even graph Wi-Fi signal strength over time*

They cannot graph it based on one standard. They can on others. You are incorrect. As I proved.

<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/PZuec56EWB0>
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/PZuec56EWB0>

The funny thing is Alan Baker agreed with Snit, as did Lewis & nospam.

Because I was correct, as proved in the video you link to.

You Apple religious nutcase zealots always defend your God to the death, no matter what, using the first inane idiocy that pops into your heads.

I showed proof of my claim.

Not a single one of you religious zealots is aware that no other operating system won't let you load software without the mothership OEM account.

This is an unsupported claim.

Just Apple.
Nobody else.

You have to log into the device so many times a day that people would be throwing iPhones off the next bridge if it didn't have that FaceID gimmick.

Security is good. And I used to have one without FaceID. Their current
flagship lacks it. Your claim is clearly incorrect.

Only an Apple religious zealot nutcase would be unaware of that basic fact.

You are making things up. Again.
--
It's impossible for someone who is at war with themselves to be at peace with you.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On Sep 29, 2026 at 12:25:04rC>PM EDT, "Alan" <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

On 2026-09-29 08:32, Maria Sophia wrote:

CrudeSausage wrote:

Is he as retarded as Snit?

Apple religious zealot nutcases have been trying to prove me wrong for
years and you've never even once found any facts from me to be wrong.

For example, this is Snit claiming that a megabit per second is a decibel. >> *Snit video purportedly proving that a decibel is a megabitperseconde!*
<https://youtu.be/7QaABa6DFIo>

Ummmmmm...nope!

*It's a fact iOS devices can't even graph Wi-Fi signal strength over time*

It's also a fact that almost no one cares.

<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/PZuec56EWB0>

"429 Too Many Requests"

<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/PZuec56EWB0>

"429 Too Many Requests"

The funny thing is Alan Baker agreed with Snit, as did Lewis & nospam.

Wrong.

You Apple religious nutcase zealots always defend your God to the death, no >> matter what, using the first inane idiocy that pops into your heads.

Not a single one of you religious zealots is aware that no other operating >> system won't let you load software without the mothership OEM account.

Just Apple.
Nobody else.

You have to log into the device so many times a day that people would be
throwing iPhones off the next bridge if it didn't have that FaceID gimmick. >>

False. As usual.

Only an Apple religious zealot nutcase would be unaware of that basic fact.

I notice you've completely dropped out the text showing that Apple is
not requiring you to use FaceID...

Oh look. Arlen is tripling down on his absurd claims. Again.

But since he is the only "religious nutcase zealot" here, that makes perfect sense.

Not to mention that he has to defend his perfect 100% record of always being wrong when it comes to ANYTHING about Apple.

Because trolling is his entire life.

Hey Arlen. I now have 3 iPhones and 19 iPads. Including two 11 year old iPad Air 2s and two 11 year old iPad mini 4s, all 4 of which have had 3 iPadOS updates this year alone - 15.8.6, 15.8.7 and 15.8.8. Plus 2 updates last
year. Plus 3 updates in 2024. Plus 7 updates in 2023, when they were all 7 years old.

Show us an 11 year old Android ANYTHING that is still WORKING, let alone still getting OS updates.

Also including 2 iPad Air 3s that are 7.5 years old and are updated to 26.7.
Still current after 7.5 years. Imagine that. And will no doubt have several more years of support. 26.7.1 is now available.

BTW, I have never used/needed FaceID on any of them. So that's 2 of your
absurd bullshit trolling claims shot down with a single bullet.

So why don't you be a good little boy and go Fuck Off now. Stop interrupting the adults.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

FACTS:

It's clear none of you Apple religious nutcases could get an education
above high school, so maybe you missed the first ten thousand times that
we've explained that just getting an update is something all OEMs do.

Windows takes the cake, actually, by giving updates 17 years after initial release, but Google also does updates forever with Project Mainline.

Those facts are lost on you Apple religious zealot nutcases, where even
though this has been explained a thousand times, you're incapable of
learning, which, after all, is how I know you have zero education.

The facts are that Apple promised only a measly 5 years of full updates
when the EU/UK forced them to put their policy in writing, while the
competitor to Apple (mainly Galaxy S series and Pixel) promised 7 years.

Which means Apple's promised support sucks compared to that of Android competition, which really is only Samsung Galaxy S series based on price.

Again, that fact is lost on you Apple religious nutcases because you have
no idea what a full update is, since only Apple has never in its entire
history never fully supported more than one operating system at a time.

As for logging into the platform, only Apple forces you to have an account
if you want to install software. Google doesn't. Microsoft doesn't.

Only Apple.

Which brings us to the FaceID gimmick that Apple promotes, simply because
only Apple requires a log in to the mothership just to install software.

FACTS:
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

FACTS:

It's clear none of you Apple religious nutcases could get an education
above high school, so maybe you missed the first ten thousand times that
we've explained that just getting an update is something all OEMs do.

Windows takes the cake, actually, by giving updates 17 years after initial release, but Google also does updates forever with Project Mainline.

Those facts are lost on you Apple religious zealot nutcases, where even
though this has been explained a thousand times, you're incapable of
learning, which, after all, is how I know you have zero education.

The facts are that Apple promised only a measly 5 years of full updates
when the EU/UK forced them to put their policy in writing, while the
competitor to Apple (mainly Galaxy S series and Pixel) promised 7 years.

Which means Apple's promised support sucks compared to that of Android competition, which really is only Samsung Galaxy S series based on price.

Again, that fact is lost on you Apple religious nutcases because you have
no idea what a full update is, since only Apple has never in its entire
history never fully supported more than one operating system at a time.

As for logging into the platform, only Apple forces you to have an account
if you want to install software. Google doesn't. Microsoft doesn't.

Only Apple.

Which brings us to the FaceID gimmick that Apple promotes, simply because
only Apple requires a log in to the mothership just to install software.

FACTS:
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On Sep 29, 2026 at 2:57:20rC>PM MST, "Maria Sophia" wrote <119hc82$2e8i$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>:

FACTS:

It's clear none of you Apple religious nutcases could get an education
above high school, so maybe you missed the first ten thousand times that we've explained that just getting an update is something all OEMs do.

You have put me in the group of "Apple religious nutcases". I have more education than you list.

You are, again, wrong.

...
--
It's impossible for someone who is at war with themselves to be at peace with you.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On 2026-09-29 14:53, Maria Sophia wrote:

FACTS:

It's clear...

...that you're a joke.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> wrote:

FACTS:

It's clear none of you Apple religious nutcases could get an education
above high school, so maybe you missed the first ten thousand times that we've explained that just getting an update is something all OEMs do.

Oh dear. Donald mode triggered...

The facts are that Apple promised only a measly 5 years of full updates
when the EU/UK forced them to put their policy in writing, while the competitor to Apple (mainly Galaxy S series and Pixel) promised 7 years.

False. We all agreed that Apple's is "a minimum" of five years and the
others is a maximum. And during that maximum period the cadence of updates drops as low as quarterly and only includes security updates.

Which means Apple's promised support sucks compared to that of Android competition, which really is only Samsung Galaxy S series based on price.

False. We all agreed that the average real world and full support (not just security updates) for iphones is 6.5 years over the last decade. Currently supported phones are seeing seven years of support.

No Galaxy S nor Google Pixel has seen more than about four years of full support so far.

We also proved that iphones get security updates for years after full
support ends.

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

On 2026-09-29 14:53, Maria Sophia wrote:

FACTS:

It's clear...

...that you're a joke.

Indeed, because IT is an Ignorant Troll.

Notice how IT clings to the rCLpromiserCY made by Samsung for 7 years of support. Meanwhile - at this very instant - Apple is supporting 11, 10,
9, 8 and 7 year old hardware. iPads and iPhones.

Hey IT. Do come back in 2033 or 2036 or whenever, when Samsung becomes
the SECOND company to support 11 year old phones and tablets.

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2