Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com>
Newsgroups: misc.phone.mobile.iphone,comp.mobile.android
Subject: Re: What's the actual *advantage* of not having an sd slot?
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2025 09:00:54 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 175
Message-ID: <103jqrm$3he17$2@dont-email.me>
References: <102mrt3$18oa$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>
 <102ms2a$103nl$4@dont-email.me> <102mseb$rp0i$1@solani.org>
 <mbb2guFe5gkU1@mid.individual.net>
 <102rt1l$2qtb$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>
 <102rvj8$2f4ce$1@dont-email.me>
 <xn0p75k935pwiu7000@reader443.eternal-september.org>
 <102s4mh$2gcuo$1@dont-email.me>
 <102s74s$ugh$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>
 <mbdqfaFs3e2U3@mid.individual.net>
 <102tksc$2k63$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>
 <mhdailxbbn.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>
 <103479b$1ocv$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>
 <2aevilxmaa.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>
 <103jqaa$2utd$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2025 18:00:55 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="1c8fd06282cc41f516ad688665ea55cd";
	logging-data="3717159"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18BVYHgSAXo9YDYzF2JCZKr4b5rNOhoFeQ="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:ZnH3XyzZxTEJs3aFEEeNdPIkxNk=
Content-Language: en-CA
In-Reply-To: <103jqaa$2utd$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>

On 2025-06-26 08:51, Marion wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Jun 2025 10:51:46 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote :
> 
> 
>> Writing again the quoting you removed:
>>
>> ]
>> ]> So a phone w/o an aux jack is *always* an inferior phone to one with it.
>> ]>                       (all else being equal)
> 
> Carlos,
> 
> I am trying to be nice when I say you can't say logic is wrong.

You're a narcissist who's trying to pretend to be nice, so you can go 
back to your insulting ways while claiming you've been persecuted.

> 
> There are X number of things a phone with the aux jack can do.
> There are fewer than X number of things a phone without it can do.

And if none of those things matter to the individuals who purchase such 
a phone, an aux jack is just something they need to pay for that they 
won't use.

> 
> That's just pure unassailable logic, Carlos.
> For you to disagree with that logic means you don't understand logic.

It's "unassailable"...

....but utterly irrelevant.

> 
> 
>>> It explains a lot when you claim that facts are opinions, as I've heard
>>> that a lot - but usually they're not confused on an Android newsgroup.
>>
>> And opinions are not fact. You claim that what are in fact your opinions
>> we accept as universal facts. We don't, they are just your opinions.
> 
> Carlos,
> It's not an opinion when I say there are X number of things a phone with
> the aux jack can do, while there are fewer than X number of things a phone
> without it can do.

You said that before.

> 
> If you claim that logically sensible statement is merely an opinion, open
> to debate, then it simply means you don't understand what we're discussing.
> 
> I hope I'm being nice - but I can't figure out a nicer way to say that
> either you understand that if you have two phones which are exactly the
> same except one lacks the ability of portable storage, then the phone
> without the portable storage can't do everything the phone with it can.
> 
> It's absurd that I have to even state something that obvious, Carlos.
> Nobody in the world would disagree with that logically sensible point.

Arlen, what is this fetish, Arlen, you have for mentioning people's 
names over and over again, Arlen?

> 
> Except you.
> And the Apple trolls.
> 
> The fact I have to *repeat* this is already at the point of absurdity.
> 
>>> I understand that for some people, these features might not be a priority,
>>> and they might even prefer a phone without them for design reasons.
>>> However, from a purely hardware-capability standpoint, the presence of
>>> these features means the phone can do things that the other phone simply
>>> cannot do without external accessories or cloud services."
>>
>> Yes; the phone can do something or can not. However, it has a price, it
>> uses space, dirt or water can get it.
> 
> OK. Carlos. For the first time in this message, you've been sensible.

So nice!

> 
> Of course there are drawbacks to the aux jack, where one of them is
> potential waterproofing - but - and this is what matters - nobody can find
> any evidence that phones without the aux jack have any higher IP ratings
> than phones with the aux jack. So it's a red herring.

And you won't accept that phones without an aux jack are perfectly 
capable of doing what most people want of an aux jack:

To plug in earbuds/earphones.

> 
> Likewise, of course a phone without the aux jack has more room for other
> stuff, such as, oh, say, a bigger battery. But again, there is no evidence
> that shows that is the case in the real world. Another red herring.

It's completely obvious.

> 
> Similarly, of course a phone without the aux jack should be less expensive
> than a phyone with the aux jack, but again and again, there is no evidence
> that the OEM is passing that cost savings back on to you.
> 
> So, sure, theoretically, removing the aux jack has benefits; but nobody can
> find these benefits in the real world, which is the world I happen to live
> in.

Funny how you want everyone else to provide evidence...

....but you never do.

> 
>> It is the user who decides if that
>> characteristic is important to him or not. If the user doesn't care,
>> then it is irrelevant.
>>
>> Me, I prefer to have the jack. To me it is important.
> 
> This is the second time you've said something sensible in this post.
> 
> Nobody sensible would agree that if you don't need or want something, than
> not having it is no loss - but - and this is big - there's a catch.
> 
> Remember when Arno said he didn't need portable storage because he paid an
> arm and a leg for a phone that had enough internal storage to last him the
> lifetime of the phone? Remember that?
> 
> So there *is* a penalty.
> 
> Likewise, remember someone said that they don't use wired headphones so
> they don't need the aux jack? Of course, that's fine - but - and this is
> important - can you charge the phone and use the USB port for headphones
> simultaneously? What if your bluetooth battery dies in your headphones?
> What if you're on a long international trip on a plane where you must use
> headphones the entire time?
> 
> The fact is unassailable that if you take two phones, where the only
> difference is one lacks the headphone jack, that the phone with the
> headphone jack has X amount of capabilities, while the phone without it has
> less than X amount of capabilities. That's just an unassailable fact.
> 
> It's not an opinion.
> It's a fact.
> 
> It's distasteful that I have to repeat something so obvious.
> 
>>> Think of it like a car. A car with a tow hitch has the capability to tow a
>>> trailer. A car without one doesn't. Even if someone never tows a trailer,
>>> the car with the hitch still possesses that extra capability that the other
>>> one lacks. It's not about whether they use it, but whether the inherent
>>> functionality is present.
>>
>> A tow hitch has the capability to damage greatly another car when
>> reversing in a parking, and you have to pay expensive damages. So, it
>> makes parking more difficult and dangerous.
> 
> When you resort to attacking the analogy, it means you have no defense to
> the logical argument that the phone with the headphone jack has X amount of
> capabilities, while the phone without it has less than X amount of
> capabilities. That's just an unassailable fact you happen to not like.
> 
> You don't appear to like that fact.
> But not liking facts doesn't change that they're facts nonetheless.
> 
> It's distasteful that I have to explain something so obvious.
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========