Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:all (Score 1) 105

by Geeky (#48193663) Attached to: Which Android Devices Sacrifice Battery-Life For Performance?

I get between two and four days from a Nexus 5, depending on usage. My take on it is that it's a smartphone only when I need it to be. Most of the time I'll use it for no more than email, sms and calls which I agree could be handled by a feature phone (although not as easily for sms and emails - the larger screen and keyboard come into play there).

The difference for me is that it has all the features when I need them - better browsing capability, gps and a good screen for maps, half decent camera (within the limitations of the form factor, obviously) and all the other stuff.

I have considered the alternative of a feature - or even dumb - phone for battery life and then taking a tablet when I need more, but the phone does it all for me at a convenient size. The battery lasts long enough, and I know the trade off when I use the features that make it "smart".

Comment: Re:Clueless (Score 1) 328

by Geeky (#48179765) Attached to: Despite Patent Settlement, Apple Pulls Bose Merchandise From Its Stores

I'm about 80% deaf in one ear, so instead of higher frequencies I get permanent tinnitus, which is basically exactly that - it varies according to things like heart rate. It's like listening to an old modem, or something like a ZX Spectrum loading a game. 24x7. It came on as an adult, so it took a bit of getting used to - some people can't cope and suffer depression or even become suicidal over it.

Comment: Re:What's the point anymore? (Score 1) 201

by Geeky (#48152815) Attached to: Google Announces Motorola-Made Nexus 6 and HTC-Made Nexus 9

Yeah, I got one because I didn't want to be on contract or have all the bloatware, and the Nexus 5 is/was great value. Looks like I'll be sticking with it, and maybe even getting a like for like replacement if it breaks, because I don't want a phablet. I have a tablet, what I want in a phone is something I can put in my pocket. The Nexus 5 is pretty much at the limit already.

I'd even buy a more expensive unlocked phone from someone else, but then you've got to put up with the non-standard interfaces.

Doesn't really matter though - the Nexus 5 is still a pretty respectable spec.

Comment: Re:Encryption (Score 1) 126

by Geeky (#47945015) Attached to: Next Android To Enable Local Encryption By Default Too, Says Google

With Android you have to accept all permissions an app wants or not install it. On iOS apps have no permissions other than internet access and have to ask for permission. The permission can be refused, and the app still works just without the feature being requested - e.g. refuse location access and the app can't offer you location based features, obviously.

This granularity is not available with Android.

Comment: Re:show stopper (Score 1) 126

by Geeky (#47944593) Attached to: Next Android To Enable Local Encryption By Default Too, Says Google

Well hopefully it's not too long to wait until L comes out and the first one will be answered. As for the second, it's just irritating that I can't get apps that just connect to their respective services. Not much chance of it, but it'd be great if the likes of Twitter and Facebook released cut down versions that only connected to them and didn't demand access to contacts, SMS etc. It's a refreshing change when an app requires no special permissions, or at least none that aren't obvious for its primary role.

Comment: Re:show stopper (Score 2) 126

by Geeky (#47944113) Attached to: Next Android To Enable Local Encryption By Default Too, Says Google

I've seen talk of automatically unlocking when connected to specific bluetooth devices or by location (which looks like it might require GPS?). That's handy, but I haven't seen anything about specific wifi networks. I don't want GPS running all the time because of the battery drain, but would like my phone unlocked on my home wifi. Preferably out of the box without needing a third party app that wants all sorts of permissions.

Off topic, but for me the biggest issue with (non-rooted) Android is the permissions model that forces all or nothing acceptance for permissions. I want certain apps, but want to refuse them access to, say, SMS messages. I can't do that. The permissions manager feature appeared briefly in, I think 4.3, but then disappeared. That alone is the thing that has me considering jumping ship to Apple.

Comment: Re: What about other devices? (Score 1) 421

by Geeky (#47891451) Attached to: Windows Tax Shot Down In Italy

Which is the argument for why this doesn't apply to Apple hardware (computers and phones) and to an arguably lesser extent Android (in that case there is a separation - the phone is made by Samsung, HTC etc, the OS by Google, so the argument that they're integrated is weaker).

My point is that the average consumer doesn't care. They want a Windows machine, and probably don't really care if it's HP, Acer or whoever - it's Windows they want.

So while there's a legal argument around bundling, it's not really a consumer protection issue. The number of buyers who would actually want to install an alternative OS (or be able to) is tiny.

Comment: Re:What about other devices? (Score 1) 421

by Geeky (#47890575) Attached to: Windows Tax Shot Down In Italy

Yeah, except it is possible to get OSX running on a PC, or in a VM. Apple just don't allow it. It's a shame, because I'd love a mini tower with at least three drive bays, built in CD burner and card reader and only one mid-range graphics card - a nice neat device with no need for a nest of cables and external devices. But I also want OSX. Turns out I can't have both because Apple's idea of a high end workstation is basically an iMac without a screen in terms of how well it fits my needs.

It's a shame, because the best of both worlds would be OSX with the flexibility of building your own hardware.

Comment: Re: What about other devices? (Score 2) 421

by Geeky (#47890533) Attached to: Windows Tax Shot Down In Italy

The question is where you draw the line. My smart TV clearly has an OS, but I'm not sure there's a clamour for the likes of Panasonic or Samsung to stop "bundling" the OS with the TV. The TV is capable of being a general purpose computer but most people wouldn't see it like that. People want to buy a TV that just works, they don't want to buy a TV and then figure out what OS to install on it to get it to work. Same with phones, for most people.

So why should computers be different? Bundling helps the average consumer more than it hurts - you buy a PC, you get Windows, you buy a Mac you get OSX, all ready to use straight out of the box.

Things are not as simple as they seems at first. - Edward Thorp

Working...