is my phone ON or is it OFF?

[bad sector]

The net is full of people having issues with phones they only thought
were OFF. My android Zflip is even worse that a simple conventional
design. Most times I turn it OFF/ON to be sure, there being no obvious,
bulletproof, always in your face, indication which should be a prerequisite.

[Andy Burns]

Post by bad sector
The net is full of people having issues with phones they only thought
were OFF.

If you press the power button* and the screen comes on in under one
second the phone wasn't OFF, it was just ASLEEP.


[*] or any other action such as lifting it up, or touching the screen,
or poking the fingerprint reader.

[Jeff Layman]

Post by Andy Burns

Post by bad sector
The net is full of people having issues with phones they only thought
were OFF.

If you press the power button* and the screen comes on in under one
second the phone wasn't OFF, it was just ASLEEP.

I think that's a too inactive term! It's checking with the cell towers
regularly, waiting to see if there are any messages or emails. It's
sending location data, also possibly using bluetooth and/or Wi-Fi to see
what's going on nearby, and who knows what else. I would say it's just
"got its eyes closed" while doing what it's been told to do. :-)

Post by Andy Burns
[*] or any other action such as lifting it up, or touching the screen,
or poking the fingerprint reader.

The lifting it up thing is interesting. I wonder if that's done with an
accelerometer? If so, it would be checking that too.

[Andy Burns]

Post by Jeff Layman

Post by Andy Burns
any other action such as lifting it up, or touching the screen,
or poking the fingerprint reader.

The lifting it up thing is interesting. I wonder if that's done with an
accelerometer? If so, it would be checking that too.

Most likely, though mine probably uses a magnetometer too, as it can do
different things depending if it's face-up or face-down.

With the enhanced "find my device" service, for newer phones being
turned OFF will no longer mean really OFF, bluetooth (and UWB?) will
still be active ...

[knuttle]

Post by Andy Burns

Post by Jeff Layman

Post by Andy Burns
any other action such as lifting it up, or touching the screen,
or poking the fingerprint reader.

The lifting it up thing is interesting. I wonder if that's done with
an accelerometer? If so, it would be checking that too.

Most likely, though mine probably uses a magnetometer too, as it can do
different things depending if it's face-up or face-down.
With the enhanced "find my device" service, for newer phones being
turned OFF will no longer mean really OFF, bluetooth (and UWB?) will
still be active ...

I don't have a lot of experience with cell phones, but mine can be
turned off. To turn it off complete you press and hold the power key
until a screen comes up that gives a couple of options. On is to turn
of the cell phone. When you press the power button, it goes through
the complete start up routine that it went through when purchased.

[Nick Cine]

Post by Jeff Layman

Post by Andy Burns
[*] or any other action such as lifting it up, or touching the screen,
or poking the fingerprint reader.

The lifting it up thing is interesting. I wonder if that's done with an
accelerometer? If so, it would be checking that too.

A few more comments, but I don't know much about this topic.

1. Even if a phone is "off", when you plug in a charger, "something
happens", so is it really off? I don't know, but how does it charge?

2. The government has, in the past, secretly modified gangster's phones
such that they looked to be off, but were secretly still transmitting.

3. The iPhone, I believe, is never off, which, I'm told, is how the FindMy
sensing works for stolen phones.

How does any of that work? I don't know.

[bad💽sector]

Post by Nick Cine

Post by Jeff Layman

Post by Andy Burns
[*] or any other action such as lifting it up, or touching the screen,
or poking the fingerprint reader.

The lifting it up thing is interesting. I wonder if that's done with an
accelerometer? If so, it would be checking that too.

A few more comments, but I don't know much about this topic.
1. Even if a phone is "off", when you plug in a charger, "something
happens", so is it really off? I don't know, but how does it charge?
2. The government has, in the past, secretly modified gangster's phones
such that they looked to be off, but were secretly still transmitting.
3. The iPhone, I believe, is never off, which, I'm told, is how the FindMy
sensing works for stolen phones.
How does any of that work? I don't know.

For one thing the battery should be removable with one hand,
blindfolded, in 3 seconds or less.

[micky]

In comp.mobile.android, on Thu, 25 Apr 2024 07:00:53 -0400, bad?sector

Post by bad💽sector

Post by Nick Cine

Post by Jeff Layman

Post by Andy Burns
[*] or any other action such as lifting it up, or touching the screen,
or poking the fingerprint reader.

The lifting it up thing is interesting. I wonder if that's done with an
accelerometer? If so, it would be checking that too.

A few more comments, but I don't know much about this topic.
1. Even if a phone is "off", when you plug in a charger, "something
happens", so is it really off? I don't know, but how does it charge?
2. The government has, in the past, secretly modified gangster's phones
such that they looked to be off, but were secretly still transmitting.
3. The iPhone, I believe, is never off, which, I'm told, is how the FindMy
sensing works for stolen phones.
How does any of that work? I don't know.

For one thing the battery should be removable with one hand,
blindfolded, in 3 seconds or less.

Wyatt Earp could do that but I can't.

[bad sector]

Post by micky
In comp.mobile.android, on Thu, 25 Apr 2024 07:00:53 -0400, bad?sector

Post by bad💽sector

Post by Nick Cine

Post by Jeff Layman

Post by Andy Burns
[*] or any other action such as lifting it up, or touching the screen,
or poking the fingerprint reader.

The lifting it up thing is interesting. I wonder if that's done with an
accelerometer? If so, it would be checking that too.

A few more comments, but I don't know much about this topic.
1. Even if a phone is "off", when you plug in a charger, "something
happens", so is it really off? I don't know, but how does it charge?
2. The government has, in the past, secretly modified gangster's phones
such that they looked to be off, but were secretly still transmitting.
3. The iPhone, I believe, is never off, which, I'm told, is how the FindMy
sensing works for stolen phones.
How does any of that work? I don't know.

For one thing the battery should be removable with one hand,
blindfolded, in 3 seconds or less.

Wyatt Earp could do that but I can't.

Regulations require it for oxygen masks, if enough people demand it the
same lawmakers can just as easily require it for cell phones as well.

[Carlos E.R.]

Post by bad sector

Post by micky
In comp.mobile.android, on Thu, 25 Apr 2024 07:00:53 -0400, bad?sector

Post by bad💽sector

Post by Nick Cine

Post by Jeff Layman

Post by Andy Burns
[*] or any other action such as lifting it up, or touching the screen,
or poking the fingerprint reader.

The lifting it up thing is interesting. I wonder if that's done with an
accelerometer? If so, it would be checking that too.

A few more comments, but I don't know much about this topic.
1. Even if a phone is "off", when you plug in a charger, "something
     happens", so is it really off? I don't know, but how does it
charge?
2. The government has, in the past, secretly modified gangster's phones
     such that they looked to be off, but were secretly still
transmitting.
3. The iPhone, I believe, is never off, which, I'm told, is how the FindMy
     sensing works for stolen phones.
How does any of that work? I don't know.

For one thing the battery should be removable with one hand,
blindfolded, in 3 seconds or less.

Wyatt Earp could do that but I can't.

Regulations require it for oxygen masks, if enough people demand it the
same lawmakers can just as easily require it for cell phones as well.

The EU is planning to regulate user replaceable batteries in phones and
other devices. No mention of doing it "with one hand, blindfolded, in 3
seconds or less", though.

[Jörg Lorenz]

Post by Carlos E.R.

Post by bad sector

Post by micky
In comp.mobile.android, on Thu, 25 Apr 2024 07:00:53 -0400, bad?sector

Post by bad💽sector

Post by Nick Cine

Post by Jeff Layman

Post by Andy Burns
[*] or any other action such as lifting it up, or touching the screen,
or poking the fingerprint reader.

The lifting it up thing is interesting. I wonder if that's done with an
accelerometer? If so, it would be checking that too.

A few more comments, but I don't know much about this topic.
1. Even if a phone is "off", when you plug in a charger, "something
     happens", so is it really off? I don't know, but how does it
charge?
2. The government has, in the past, secretly modified gangster's phones
     such that they looked to be off, but were secretly still
transmitting.
3. The iPhone, I believe, is never off, which, I'm told, is how the FindMy
     sensing works for stolen phones.
How does any of that work? I don't know.

For one thing the battery should be removable with one hand,
blindfolded, in 3 seconds or less.

Wyatt Earp could do that but I can't.

Regulations require it for oxygen masks, if enough people demand it the
same lawmakers can just as easily require it for cell phones as well.

The EU is planning to regulate user replaceable batteries in phones and
other devices. No mention of doing it "with one hand, blindfolded, in 3
seconds or less", though.

Readjust your irony sensors, Carlos.

[bad💽sector]

Post by Carlos E.R.

Post by bad sector

Post by micky
In comp.mobile.android, on Thu, 25 Apr 2024 07:00:53 -0400, bad?sector

Post by bad💽sector

Post by Nick Cine

Post by Jeff Layman

Post by Andy Burns
[*] or any other action such as lifting it up, or touching the screen,
or poking the fingerprint reader.

The lifting it up thing is interesting. I wonder if that's done with an
accelerometer? If so, it would be checking that too.

A few more comments, but I don't know much about this topic.
1. Even if a phone is "off", when you plug in a charger, "something
     happens", so is it really off? I don't know, but how does it
charge?
2. The government has, in the past, secretly modified gangster's phones
     such that they looked to be off, but were secretly still
transmitting.
3. The iPhone, I believe, is never off, which, I'm told, is how the FindMy
     sensing works for stolen phones.
How does any of that work? I don't know.

For one thing the battery should be removable with one hand,
blindfolded, in 3 seconds or less.

Wyatt Earp could do that but I can't.

Regulations require it for oxygen masks, if enough people demand it
the same lawmakers can just as easily require it for cell phones as well.

The EU is planning to regulate user replaceable batteries in phones and
other devices. No mention of doing it "with one hand, blindfolded, in 3
seconds or less", though.

I don't think they know what it means :-)

Seriously, they're way ahead of us in handling foxes in chicken-coops! I
say if a camera can have an easily ejectable battery then so can a
phone. period.

[Carlos E.R.]

Post by bad💽sector

Post by Carlos E.R.

Post by bad sector

Post by micky
In comp.mobile.android, on Thu, 25 Apr 2024 07:00:53 -0400, bad?sector

...

Post by bad💽sector

Post by Carlos E.R.

Post by bad sector

Post by micky

Post by bad💽sector

Post by Nick Cine
How does any of that work? I don't know.

For one thing the battery should be removable with one hand,
blindfolded, in 3 seconds or less.

Wyatt Earp could do that but I can't.

Regulations require it for oxygen masks, if enough people demand it
the same lawmakers can just as easily require it for cell phones as well.

The EU is planning to regulate user replaceable batteries in phones
and other devices. No mention of doing it "with one hand, blindfolded,
in 3 seconds or less", though.

I don't think they know what it means :-)
Seriously, they're way ahead of us in handling foxes in chicken-coops! I
say if a camera can have an easily ejectable battery then so can a
phone. period.

Yes, but cameras are significantly thicker. And they are not water
proof. Not even rain resistant.

[Jörg Lorenz]

Post by Carlos E.R.

Post by bad💽sector

Post by Carlos E.R.
The EU is planning to regulate user replaceable batteries in phones
and other devices. No mention of doing it "with one hand, blindfolded,
in 3 seconds or less", though.

I don't think they know what it means :-)
Seriously, they're way ahead of us in handling foxes in chicken-coops! I
say if a camera can have an easily ejectable battery then so can a
phone. period.

Yes, but cameras are significantly thicker. And they are not water
proof. Not even rain resistant.

Bingo!

[bad sector]

Post by Carlos E.R.

Post by bad💽sector

Post by Carlos E.R.

Post by bad sector

Post by micky
In comp.mobile.android, on Thu, 25 Apr 2024 07:00:53 -0400, bad?sector

...

Post by bad💽sector

Post by Carlos E.R.

Post by bad sector

Post by micky

Post by bad💽sector

Post by Nick Cine
How does any of that work? I don't know.

For one thing the battery should be removable with one hand,
blindfolded, in 3 seconds or less.

Wyatt Earp could do that but I can't.

Regulations require it for oxygen masks, if enough people demand it
the same lawmakers can just as easily require it for cell phones as well.

The EU is planning to regulate user replaceable batteries in phones
and other devices. No mention of doing it "with one hand,
blindfolded, in 3 seconds or less", though.

I don't think they know what it means :-)
Seriously, they're way ahead of us in handling foxes in chicken-coops!
I say if a camera can have an easily ejectable battery then so can a
phone. period.

Yes, but cameras are significantly thicker. And they are not water
proof. Not even rain resistant.

Reasonably good point and a hard switch can handle that, but a battery
having no moving parts is easy enough to waterproof too.

[Jeff Layman]

Post by Nick Cine

Post by Jeff Layman

Post by Andy Burns
[*] or any other action such as lifting it up, or touching the screen,
or poking the fingerprint reader.

The lifting it up thing is interesting. I wonder if that's done with an
accelerometer? If so, it would be checking that too.

A few more comments, but I don't know much about this topic.
1. Even if a phone is "off", when you plug in a charger, "something
happens", so is it really off? I don't know, but how does it charge?

The charging circuitry is within the battery itself. It controls the
rate of charge and, in particular, monitors the temperature of the
cell(s). If it gets too high it will stop the charging. Note though,
that the connection from the phone's charger socket (lightning, USB, or
whatever) goes through some of the phone's circuitry, so the phone knows
the state of charge of its battery. That way its % charge can be
displayed on the phone's screen, and battery-usage apps can let you know
what's being used and how long the phone might last before recharging is
essential.

Post by Nick Cine
2. The government has, in the past, secretly modified gangster's phones
such that they looked to be off, but were secretly still transmitting.

What makes you think that was in the past and only affected crim's
phones?! ;-)

Post by Nick Cine
3. The iPhone, I believe, is never off, which, I'm told, is how the FindMy
sensing works for stolen phones.

I don't know about iPhones, but with my Xiaomi Android phone I can
supposedly switch off "Find my phone". However, I'm not in control of
the OS and really have little idea of what it does in the background.
And even if you do work it all out, the next time an OS update appears
you could be back at square one again!

You can only be sure that a phone is truly off by removing its battery,
and that is becoming less likely every time a new model comes out. If
you power down "completely" by, for example, giving a long press on the
power switch, then you still have to accept the Manufacturer's word that
the phone is "off" as there's no way of testing it AFAIAA.

Post by Nick Cine
How does any of that work? I don't know.

[Frank Slootweg]

Jeff Layman <***@invalid.invalid> wrote:
[...]

Post by Jeff Layman
The charging circuitry is within the battery itself. It controls the
rate of charge and, in particular, monitors the temperature of the
cell(s). If it gets too high it will stop the charging. Note though,
that the connection from the phone's charger socket (lightning, USB, or
whatever) goes through some of the phone's circuitry, so the phone knows
the state of charge of its battery. That way its % charge can be
displayed on the phone's screen, and battery-usage apps can let you know
what's being used and how long the phone might last before recharging is
essential.

The fact that the phone is charging and how full its battery is, is
also displayed/displayable when the phone is switched 'off'.

Ergo, the phone is never really off. It's either awake or sleeping
during normal use or in cold standby when the user switched it 'off'.

[...]

[Jörg Lorenz]

Post by Frank Slootweg
[...]

Post by Jeff Layman
The charging circuitry is within the battery itself. It controls the
rate of charge and, in particular, monitors the temperature of the
cell(s). If it gets too high it will stop the charging. Note though,
that the connection from the phone's charger socket (lightning, USB, or
whatever) goes through some of the phone's circuitry, so the phone knows
the state of charge of its battery. That way its % charge can be
displayed on the phone's screen, and battery-usage apps can let you know
what's being used and how long the phone might last before recharging is
essential.

The fact that the phone is charging and how full its battery is, is
also displayed/displayable when the phone is switched 'off'.
Ergo, the phone is never really off. It's either awake or sleeping
during normal use or in cold standby when the user switched it 'off'.

Bullshit!
The OS is not booted when the Android is turned off.

[Theo]

Post by Jörg Lorenz

Post by Frank Slootweg
[...]

Post by Jeff Layman
The charging circuitry is within the battery itself. It controls the
rate of charge and, in particular, monitors the temperature of the
cell(s). If it gets too high it will stop the charging. Note though,
that the connection from the phone's charger socket (lightning, USB, or
whatever) goes through some of the phone's circuitry, so the phone knows
the state of charge of its battery. That way its % charge can be
displayed on the phone's screen, and battery-usage apps can let you know
what's being used and how long the phone might last before recharging is
essential.

The fact that the phone is charging and how full its battery is, is
also displayed/displayable when the phone is switched 'off'.
Ergo, the phone is never really off. It's either awake or sleeping
during normal use or in cold standby when the user switched it 'off'.

Bullshit!
The OS is not booted when the Android is turned off.

AIUI it is, kind of. When you plug in the charger with the phone off, the
phone starts. The bootloader then launches the Android kernel with the flag
androidboot.mode=charger

Instead of doing the full Android boot, that causes the kernel to launch a
charger UI application that shows your battery percentage on the screen or
an animation (which comes from files on your OS partition). The charger app
doesn't allow you to otherwise interact with the phone and other services
like the radios aren't running, but the SoC is booted and running software.
The SoC is also doing standard power management, ie the charging process
here likely looks very similar to charging when the phone is turned on
(because it is, in essence).

The full OS services are not running, but the Android kernel and the charger
app is.

Theo
(usual caveats: my understanding may be out of date, different vendors may
do their own thing, etc)

[Jörg Lorenz]

Post by Theo

Post by Jörg Lorenz
Bullshit!
The OS is not booted when the Android is turned off.

AIUI it is, kind of.

Even not a kind of.

[Carlos E.R.]

Post by Theo

Post by Jörg Lorenz

Post by Frank Slootweg
[...]

Post by Jeff Layman
The charging circuitry is within the battery itself. It controls the
rate of charge and, in particular, monitors the temperature of the
cell(s). If it gets too high it will stop the charging. Note though,
that the connection from the phone's charger socket (lightning, USB, or
whatever) goes through some of the phone's circuitry, so the phone knows
the state of charge of its battery. That way its % charge can be
displayed on the phone's screen, and battery-usage apps can let you know
what's being used and how long the phone might last before recharging is
essential.

The fact that the phone is charging and how full its battery is, is
also displayed/displayable when the phone is switched 'off'.
Ergo, the phone is never really off. It's either awake or sleeping
during normal use or in cold standby when the user switched it 'off'.

Bullshit!
The OS is not booted when the Android is turned off.

AIUI it is, kind of. When you plug in the charger with the phone off, the
phone starts. The bootloader then launches the Android kernel with the flag
androidboot.mode=charger
Instead of doing the full Android boot, that causes the kernel to launch a
charger UI application that shows your battery percentage on the screen or
an animation (which comes from files on your OS partition). The charger app
doesn't allow you to otherwise interact with the phone and other services
like the radios aren't running, but the SoC is booted and running software.
The SoC is also doing standard power management, ie the charging process
here likely looks very similar to charging when the phone is turned on
(because it is, in essence).
The full OS services are not running, but the Android kernel and the charger
app is.
Theo
(usual caveats: my understanding may be out of date, different vendors may
do their own thing, etc)

Hum! That's the best explanation I have seen so far. Thank you. It
explains things.

[bad💽sector]

Post by Jörg Lorenz

[...]

Post by Jeff Layman
The charging circuitry is within the battery itself. It controls the
rate of charge and, in particular, monitors the temperature of the
cell(s). If it gets too high it will stop the charging. Note though,
that the connection from the phone's charger socket (lightning, USB, or
whatever) goes through some of the phone's circuitry, so the phone knows
the state of charge of its battery. That way its % charge can be
displayed on the phone's screen, and battery-usage apps can let you know
what's being used and how long the phone might last before
recharging is
essential.

   The fact that the phone is charging and how full its battery is, is
also displayed/displayable when the phone is switched 'off'.
   Ergo, the phone is never really off. It's either awake or sleeping
during normal use or in cold standby when the user switched it 'off'.

Bullshit!
The OS is not booted when the Android is turned off.

AIUI it is, kind of.  When you plug in the charger with the phone off,
the
phone starts.  The bootloader then launches the Android kernel with
the flag
androidboot.mode=charger
Instead of doing the full Android boot, that causes the kernel to launch a
charger UI application that shows your battery percentage on the screen or
an animation (which comes from files on your OS partition).  The
charger app
doesn't allow you to otherwise interact with the phone and other services
like the radios aren't running, but the SoC is booted and running software.
The SoC is also doing standard power management, ie the charging process
here likely looks very similar to charging when the phone is turned on
(because it is, in essence).
The full OS services are not running, but the Android kernel and the charger
app is.
Theo
(usual caveats: my understanding may be out of date, different vendors may
do their own thing, etc)

Hum!  That's the best explanation I have seen so far. Thank you. It
explains things.

Like your compuer, it's sleeping with one ear (and maybe eye) open.

[Jörg Lorenz]

Post by bad💽sector

Post by Jörg Lorenz

[...]

Post by Jeff Layman
The charging circuitry is within the battery itself. It controls the
rate of charge and, in particular, monitors the temperature of the
cell(s). If it gets too high it will stop the charging. Note though,
that the connection from the phone's charger socket (lightning, USB, or
whatever) goes through some of the phone's circuitry, so the phone knows
the state of charge of its battery. That way its % charge can be
displayed on the phone's screen, and battery-usage apps can let you know
what's being used and how long the phone might last before recharging is
essential.

   The fact that the phone is charging and how full its battery is, is
also displayed/displayable when the phone is switched 'off'.
   Ergo, the phone is never really off. It's either awake or sleeping
during normal use or in cold standby when the user switched it 'off'.

Bullshit!
The OS is not booted when the Android is turned off.

AIUI it is, kind of.  When you plug in the charger with the phone off,
the
phone starts.  The bootloader then launches the Android kernel with
the flag
androidboot.mode=charger
Instead of doing the full Android boot, that causes the kernel to launch a
charger UI application that shows your battery percentage on the screen or
an animation (which comes from files on your OS partition).  The
charger app
doesn't allow you to otherwise interact with the phone and other services
like the radios aren't running, but the SoC is booted and running software.
The SoC is also doing standard power management, ie the charging process
here likely looks very similar to charging when the phone is turned on
(because it is, in essence).
The full OS services are not running, but the Android kernel and the charger
app is.
Theo
(usual caveats: my understanding may be out of date, different vendors may
do their own thing, etc)

Hum!  That's the best explanation I have seen so far. Thank you. It
explains things.

Like your compuer, it's sleeping with one ear (and maybe eye) open.

Are you trying to spread FUD again?

[Carlos E.R.]

...

Post by bad💽sector

Post by Carlos E.R.

Post by Theo

Bullshit! The OS is not booted when the Android is turned off.

AIUI it is, kind of. When you plug in the charger with the phone
off, the phone starts. The bootloader then launches the Android
kernel with the flag androidboot.mode=charger
Instead of doing the full Android boot, that causes the kernel to
launch a charger UI application that shows your battery
percentage on the screen or an animation (which comes from files
on your OS partition). The charger app doesn't allow you to
otherwise interact with the phone and other services like the
radios aren't running, but the SoC is booted and running
software. The SoC is also doing standard power management, ie the
charging process here likely looks very similar to charging when
the phone is turned on (because it is, in essence).
The full OS services are not running, but the Android kernel and
the charger app is.
Theo (usual caveats: my understanding may be out of date,
different vendors may do their own thing, etc)

Hum! That's the best explanation I have seen so far. Thank you. It
explains things.

Like your compuer, it's sleeping with one ear (and maybe eye) open.

Low power processors can do things like switch off circuitry, or stop
processing completely till some external event happens.

This is used in circuitry that runs on batteries for months, like the
speed meter of a bicycle. If the wheel doesn't turn, the processor and
everything sleeps, except the turn counter.

Well, this is the same idea: boot a different image that only powers up
what it needs in order to track battery power and charging.

Doable.

[bad💽sector]

Post by Carlos E.R.
...

Post by bad💽sector

Bullshit! The OS is not booted when the Android is turned off.

AIUI it is, kind of.  When you plug in the charger with the phone
 off, the phone starts.  The bootloader then launches the Android
kernel with the flag androidboot.mode=charger
Instead of doing the full Android boot, that causes the kernel to
 launch a charger UI application that shows your battery
percentage on the screen or an animation (which comes from files
on your OS partition).  The charger app doesn't allow you to
otherwise interact with the phone and other services like the
radios aren't running, but the SoC is booted and running software.
The SoC is also doing standard power management, ie the
charging process here likely looks very similar to charging when
the phone is turned on (because it is, in essence).
The full OS services are not running, but the Android kernel and
the charger app is.
Theo (usual caveats: my understanding may be out of date,
different vendors may do their own thing, etc)

Hum!  That's the best explanation I have seen so far. Thank you. It
 explains things.

Like your compuer, it's sleeping with one ear (and maybe eye) open.

Low power processors can do things like switch off circuitry, or stop
processing completely till some external event happens.

Like a suspersensitive motion sensor or passive mic? I don't wanna get
into that discussion, it's a whole another can of worms :-)

Post by Carlos E.R.
This is used in circuitry that runs on batteries for months, like the
speed meter of a bicycle. If the wheel doesn't turn, the processor and
everything sleeps, except the turn counter.
Well, this is the same idea: boot a different image that only powers up
what it needs in order to track battery power and charging.
Doable.

[Carlos E.R.]

Post by Nick Cine

Post by Jeff Layman

Post by Andy Burns
[*] or any other action such as lifting it up, or touching the screen,
or poking the fingerprint reader.

The lifting it up thing is interesting. I wonder if that's done with an
accelerometer? If so, it would be checking that too.

A few more comments, but I don't know much about this topic.
1. Even if a phone is "off", when you plug in a charger, "something
happens", so is it really off? I don't know, but how does it charge?

But the operating system is not running, radios are off. This can be
known because when you press the power button it takes some time before
the phone responds. It is booting.

What exact circuitry is on when the charger is connected is up to
speculation.

Post by Nick Cine
2. The government has, in the past, secretly modified gangster's phones
such that they looked to be off, but were secretly still transmitting.

Hum. Dubitable.

For one thing, the battery is spent soon if it is transmitting. A
question of hours.

Post by Nick Cine
3. The iPhone, I believe, is never off, which, I'm told, is how the FindMy
sensing works for stolen phones.
How does any of that work? I don't know.

[micky]

In comp.mobile.android, on Thu, 25 Apr 2024 15:13:40 +0200, "Carlos

Post by Carlos E.R.

Post by Nick Cine

Post by Jeff Layman

Post by Andy Burns
[*] or any other action such as lifting it up, or touching the screen,
or poking the fingerprint reader.

The lifting it up thing is interesting. I wonder if that's done with an
accelerometer? If so, it would be checking that too.

A few more comments, but I don't know much about this topic.
1. Even if a phone is "off", when you plug in a charger, "something
happens", so is it really off? I don't know, but how does it charge?

But the operating system is not running, radios are off. This can be
known because when you press the power button it takes some time before
the phone responds. It is booting.

Doesn't whether it boots or not depend on what made the screen black?

Did the OP ever say how his screen got into the situation it's in?

If the screen times out, the radios were still be running, I presume the
OS is running, the phone will ring if someone calls. HOw is that "off"?

Post by Carlos E.R.
What exact circuitry is on when the charger is connected is up to
speculation.

Post by Nick Cine
2. The government has, in the past, secretly modified gangster's phones
such that they looked to be off, but were secretly still transmitting.

Hum. Dubitable.
For one thing, the battery is spent soon if it is transmitting. A
question of hours.

Right. Unless the phone is truly Off.

Post by Carlos E.R.

Post by Nick Cine
3. The iPhone, I believe, is never off, which, I'm told, is how the FindMy
sensing works for stolen phones.
How does any of that work? I don't know.

[Jörg Lorenz]

Post by Nick Cine

Post by Jeff Layman

Post by Andy Burns
[*] or any other action such as lifting it up, or touching the screen,
or poking the fingerprint reader.

The lifting it up thing is interesting. I wonder if that's done with an
accelerometer? If so, it would be checking that too.

A few more comments, but I don't know much about this topic.

Then you better shut up.

Post by Nick Cine
1. Even if a phone is "off", when you plug in a charger, "something
happens", so is it really off? I don't know, but how does it charge?

Do you still live in the 80s of the last century? Charging electronics
is seperate from the OS.

Post by Nick Cine
2. The government has, in the past, secretly modified gangster's phones
such that they looked to be off, but were secretly still transmitting.

They call her SIRI and her boy friend is Google.

Post by Nick Cine
3. The iPhone, I believe, is never off, which, I'm told, is how the FindMy
sensing works for stolen phones.

Simple mind. Why are you writing here? Are you bored?

Post by Nick Cine
How does any of that work? I don't know.

Obviously.

[bad💽sector]

Post by Andy Burns

Post by bad sector
The net is full of people having issues with phones they only thought
were OFF.

If you press the power button* and the screen comes on in under one
second the phone wasn't OFF, it was just ASLEEP.
[*] or any other action such as lifting it up, or touching the screen,
or poking the fingerprint reader.

Sorry, I meant a call and not being powered or not. The little phone
icon is green or red or whatever. It should always be visible when the
unit is powered and should either be grayscale with a red bold X on it
when on-hook or be bright red showing a flashing lifted hook when
off-hook. The entire OS is full of ambiguities and lack of positive
fedback as far as I'm concerned. The test should be giving the phone to
someone who has never used one and asking what the current state is,
THAT's how intuitive and *unmistakable* it needs to be!

[micky]

In comp.mobile.android, on Thu, 25 Apr 2024 08:26:16 +0100, Andy Burns

Post by Andy Burns

Post by bad sector
The net is full of people having issues with phones they only thought
were OFF.

If you press the power button* and the screen comes on in under one
second the phone wasn't OFF, it was just ASLEEP.

I thought if the screen comes on in under a second that means the screen
has been blackened, and everything else was/is ON. It runs down the
battery a lot faster than sleeping should.

Post by Andy Burns
[*] or any other action such as lifting it up, or touching the screen,
or poking the fingerprint reader.

[Andy Burns]

Post by micky

Post by Andy Burns
If you press the power button* and the screen comes on in under one
second the phone wasn't OFF, it was just ASLEEP.

I thought if the screen comes on in under a second that means the screen
has been blackened, and everything else was/is ON. It runs down the
battery a lot faster than sleeping should.

That's what I mean, if you can "wake-up" the phone, in under a second,
it never was "off" to begin with ...

[Jörg Lorenz]

Post by Andy Burns

Post by micky

Post by Andy Burns
If you press the power button* and the screen comes on in under one
second the phone wasn't OFF, it was just ASLEEP.

I thought if the screen comes on in under a second that means the screen
has been blackened, and everything else was/is ON. It runs down the
battery a lot faster than sleeping should.

That's what I mean, if you can "wake-up" the phone, in under a second,
it never was "off" to begin with ...

It is just stand-by and fully functional.

[s|b]

Post by bad sector
The net is full of people having issues with phones they only thought
were OFF. My android Zflip is even worse that a simple conventional
design. Most times I turn it OFF/ON to be sure, there being no obvious,
bulletproof, always in your face, indication which should be a prerequisite.

Snowden would take out the battery to be sure. <g>

[The Real Bev]

Post by s|b

Post by bad sector
The net is full of people having issues with phones they only thought
were OFF. My android Zflip is even worse that a simple conventional
design. Most times I turn it OFF/ON to be sure, there being no obvious,
bulletproof, always in your face, indication which should be a prerequisite.

Snowden would take out the battery to be sure. <g>

I wonder if any of the phone companies offer spy-friendly
cyanide-in-the-tooth-type features in their advertising...

[bad💽sector]

Post by s|b

Post by bad sector
The net is full of people having issues with phones they only thought
were OFF. My android Zflip is even worse that a simple conventional
design. Most times I turn it OFF/ON to be sure, there being no obvious,
bulletproof, always in your face, indication which should be a prerequisite.

Snowden would take out the battery to be sure. <g>

It's like built-in wifi, first thing I do is cut it's wires and use a
usb transceiver instead for actual physical control (after sticking gum
on the camera lens and mic pinholes). The first thing we have to do to
big bro is stomp on his balls, else the scum of the earth will want a
*7/24 streaming colonoscopy* from everyone.

[Newyana2]

Post by bad sector
The net is full of people having issues with phones they only thought
were OFF. My android Zflip is even worse that a simple conventional
design. Most times I turn it OFF/ON to be sure, there being no obvious,
bulletproof, always in your face, indication which should be a
prerequisite.

Frankly I don't understand all this confusion. I have an Android
TCL Tracfone. If I press the power button it goes black but
can receive calls. I've turned off the screen. If I hold the power
button I get 3 options. One is to power off. I select that. It says
it's shutting down. I can then leave the phone in my glove
compartment for about 3 months without losing juice, and I'm
not being tracked. If I don't power down then I am tracked and
I think the battery lasts maybe 2 days. (I've only tried it once,
by accident. I never leave the power on except when making a call.)

To turn it on again I have to hold down the power button until it
vibrates, then wait for a Win98-style boot process.

Maybe it's different on some cellphones, or on iPhones? From the
posts here it sounds like all Androids work the same way that mine
does.

[bad sector]

Post by bad sector
The net is full of people having issues with phones they only thought
were OFF. My android Zflip is even worse that a simple conventional
design. Most times I turn it OFF/ON to be sure, there being no
obvious, bulletproof, always in your face, indication which should be
a prerequisite.

 Frankly I don't understand all this confusion. I have an Android
TCL Tracfone. If I press the power button it goes black but
can receive calls. I've turned off the screen. If I hold the power
button I get 3 options. One is to power off. I select that. It says
it's shutting down. I can then leave the phone in my glove
compartment for about 3 months without losing juice, and I'm
not being tracked. If I don't power down then I am tracked and
I think the battery lasts maybe 2 days. (I've only tried it once,
by accident. I never leave the power on except when making a call.)
  To turn it on again I have to hold down the power button until it
vibrates, then wait for a Win98-style boot process.
  Maybe it's different on some cellphones, or on iPhones? From the
posts here it sounds like all Androids work the same way that mine
does.

You may not understand it but the fact remains that there *is* a lot of
confusion and my take on it is that the reason for the confusion is
shitty design. There have been and continue occurring thousands of live
mic or phone incidents EVEN with well designed idiot-proof LOW-TECH
devices. Digital crap should have either a hard on/off switch that does
nothing else AND an easily removable battery. My flexphone has half a
dozen ways to be turned off and even when I will know them all by heart
they WILL NOT suffice. Having to trust that the OS has turned the mic or
itself off is not the answer; it's a bit like democracy where it isn't
the right or the wrong of the issue that decides but the will of the
user (illustration:

[Newyana2]

Post by bad sector
You may not understand it but the fact remains that there *is* a lot of
confusion and my take on it is that the reason for the confusion is
shitty design. There have been and continue occurring thousands of live
mic or phone incidents EVEN with well designed idiot-proof LOW-TECH
devices. Digital crap should have either a hard on/off switch that does
nothing else AND an easily removable battery. My flexphone has half a
dozen ways to be turned off and even when I will know them all by heart
they WILL NOT suffice. Having to trust that the OS has turned the mic or
itself off is not the answer

I can understand the frustration. One reason that I don't normally
use a cellphone is because they're natural spyware devices. A second
reason is the complexity and lockdown. Both Google and Apple are
controlling their phones in ways that should be illegal. It's like buying
a toaster that only toasts Wonder Bread and calls home to report your
toasting operation... and that can't be disabled. Every time I turn my
cellphone on now I get a regular flurry of warnings that I should
enable Google something or other. That started when I accidentally
allowed it to update. It's a madhouse of commercial sleaze.

Another issue relating to your trouble is simply that no one really
wants to turn their cellphone off. So it's designed to require some effort.
Turned off, you can't get calls. I only turn mine on when I want to
make a call, and the battery charge lasts for months. But I don't know
anyone else who does that. Everyone I know leaves it on constantly,
letting it "sleep" when it's left idle. But cellphones don't actually
sleep.
Getting a call requires constant pings of nearby towers. So the cellphone
is always on. It's just the screen lights that go out.

Given that scenario, having the mic turned on, or other such
intrusions, are a security issue, not an on/off issue, under typical
usage conditions.

The ZFlip lists several methods to turn it off. But the first and
primary one is what people have been saying: "The easiest way
to turn off the Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 5 is to press and hold the
side and volume down buttons for about 3-5 seconds. When the
power settings show up, select Power off."

https://www.androidauthority.com/how-to-turn-off-samsung-galaxy-z-flip-5-3350350/

That's exactly how my TCL works. Though I only need to hold
the lower right button, whatever that's called. There's no ambiguity.
So the question is, do you REALLY want to turn it off? If so then you
can do that and not worry about the mic, but you won't receive
calls.

[Jörg Lorenz]

Post by Newyana2

Post by bad sector
You may not understand it but the fact remains that there *is* a lot of
confusion and my take on it is that the reason for the confusion is
shitty design. There have been and continue occurring thousands of live
mic or phone incidents EVEN with well designed idiot-proof LOW-TECH
devices. Digital crap should have either a hard on/off switch that does
nothing else AND an easily removable battery. My flexphone has half a
dozen ways to be turned off and even when I will know them all by heart
they WILL NOT suffice. Having to trust that the OS has turned the mic or
itself off is not the answer

I can understand the frustration. One reason that I don't normally
use a cellphone is because they're natural spyware devices. A second
reason is the complexity and lockdown.

Why are you writing in this group?
You are lacking any credibility. And you try to spread conspiracy
theories of the worst kind like the thread starter.

[Newyana2]

Post by Jörg Lorenz
Why are you writing in this group?
You are lacking any credibility. And you try to spread conspiracy
theories of the worst kind like the thread starter.

No point in shooting the messenger. If you use
a cellphone turned on then you ARE being tracked.
Many of the apps can't be removed. Downloading of
updates can't be stopped as far as I know. What functions
can be controlled are very difficult to find. So it would
take a great deal of expertise to really control a cellphone.

This is not about conspiracy theories. There are two major
cellphone OS makers. Google and Apple. Both tightly
control the product. Both have long histories of greed and
dishonesty. Google is primarily an advertising
and data collection company. Many cellphone apps make
money by selling personal data, because no one wants to
pay for apps.

So before posting hysterical accusations,
maybe read up on the facts for yourself. But I can see
from your other posts that you like to argue and insult
people, so maybe you really don't want to know facts.
Facts can be a very pesky obstacle to indignant dogma. :)

[Jörg Lorenz]

Post by Newyana2

Post by Jörg Lorenz
Why are you writing in this group?
You are lacking any credibility. And you try to spread conspiracy
theories of the worst kind like the thread starter.

No point in shooting the messenger. If you use
a cellphone turned on then you ARE being tracked.

How do you think your service provider could bill you otherwise correctly?

Post by Newyana2
Many of the apps can't be removed. Downloading of
updates can't be stopped as far as I know. What functions

Sure they can be stopped.

Post by Newyana2
can be controlled are very difficult to find. So it would
take a great deal of expertise to really control a cellphone.

You better do not use one.

Post by Newyana2
This is not about conspiracy theories. There are two major
cellphone OS makers. Google and Apple. Both tightly
control the product. Both have long histories of greed and
dishonesty. Google is primarily an advertising
and data collection company. Many cellphone apps make
money by selling personal data, because no one wants to
pay for apps.

Do you have material news or something that is not known for at least 20
years?

Post by Newyana2
So before posting hysterical accusations,
maybe read up on the facts for yourself. But I can see
from your other posts that you like to argue and insult
people, so maybe you really don't want to know facts.
Facts can be a very pesky obstacle to indignant dogma. :)

*You* are dogmatic. You state you have no knowledge about smartphones
which I have to admit is obvious. Why are you posting such trivial
things which are at least partially wrong in a technical group?

[Newyana2]

Post by Jörg Lorenz
*You* are dogmatic. You state you have no knowledge about smartphones
which I have to admit is obvious. Why are you posting such trivial
things which are at least partially wrong in a technical group?

As I thought. You're bitter and just want to argue.
I'm sorry that life is not oging well for you, but no one
benefits from an insult contest.

[Jörg Lorenz]

Post by Newyana2

Post by Jörg Lorenz
*You* are dogmatic. You state you have no knowledge about smartphones
which I have to admit is obvious. Why are you posting such trivial
things which are at least partially wrong in a technical group?

As I thought. You're bitter and just want to argue.
I'm sorry that life is not oging well for you, but no one
benefits from an insult contest.

You are contributing nothing of value. Sorry, dear. I do not insult you.
I tell you the "truth" and plain facts. And for years you are telling
the same trivial things.

[bad sector]

Post by Jörg Lorenz

Post by Newyana2

Post by bad sector
You may not understand it but the fact remains that there *is* a lot of
confusion and my take on it is that the reason for the confusion is
shitty design. There have been and continue occurring thousands of live
mic or phone incidents EVEN with well designed idiot-proof LOW-TECH
devices. Digital crap should have either a hard on/off switch that does
nothing else AND an easily removable battery. My flexphone has half a
dozen ways to be turned off and even when I will know them all by heart
they WILL NOT suffice. Having to trust that the OS has turned the mic or
itself off is not the answer

I can understand the frustration. One reason that I don't normally
use a cellphone is because they're natural spyware devices. A second
reason is the complexity and lockdown.

Why are you writing in this group?
You are lacking any credibility. And you try to spread conspiracy
theories of the worst kind like the thread starter.

I get a kick out of barbie-boys living in la-la land; if more positive
and verifiable device controls including easy battery removal are not a
serious threat to the snooping scum of the earth then why do they shriek
in panic as if the offender had just killed their mother every time one
mentions such changes? Why would easily removable batteries be such a
bogeyman to some who claim to have no use for them if others do? Are
they paranoid and fear that the batteries might pop out and never come
back? The digital giants need to be trimmed back in terms of yards, not
millimeters; so far legislation is scarce partly because legislators are
traditionally just barely on the legal side of the septic tank and know
shit about technology ...but the situation is evolving, they comply
with the public will or soon enter oblivion.

[Newyana2]

Post by bad sector
You may not understand it but the fact remains that there *is* a lot of
confusion and my take on it is that the reason for the confusion is
shitty design. There have been and continue occurring thousands of live
mic or phone incidents EVEN with well designed idiot-proof LOW-TECH
devices. Digital crap should have either a hard on/off switch that does
nothing else AND an easily removable battery. My flexphone has half a
dozen ways to be turned off and even when I will know them all by heart
they WILL NOT suffice. Having to trust that the OS has turned the mic or
itself off is not the answer

I can understand the frustration. One reason that I don't normally
use a cellphone is because they're natural spyware devices. A second
reason is the complexity and lockdown. Both Google and Apple are
controlling their phones in ways that should be illegal. It's like buying
a toaster that only toasts Wonder Bread and calls home to report your
toasting operation... and that can't be disabled. Every time I turn my
cellphone on now I get a regular flurry of warnings that I should
enable Google something or other. That started when I accidentally
allowed it to update. It's a madhouse of commercial sleaze.

Another issue relating to your trouble is simply that no one really
wants to turn their cellphone off. So it's designed to require some effort.
Turned off, you can't get calls. I only turn mine on when I want to
make a call, and the battery charge lasts for months. But I don't know
anyone else who does that. Everyone I know leaves it on constantly,
letting it "sleep" when it's left idle. But cellphones don't actually
sleep.
Getting a call requires constant pings of nearby towers. So the cellphone
is always on. It's just the screen lights that go out.

Given that scenario, having the mic turned on, or other such
intrusions, are a security issue, not an on/off issue, under typical
usage conditions.

The ZFlip lists several methods to turn it off. But the first and
primary one is what people have been saying: "The easiest way
to turn off the Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 5 is to press and hold the
side and volume down buttons for about 3-5 seconds. When the
power settings show up, select Power off."

https://www.androidauthority.com/how-to-turn-off-samsung-galaxy-z-flip-5-3350350/

That's exactly how my TCL works. Though I only need to hold
the lower right button, whatever that's called. There's no ambiguity.
So the question is, do you REALLY want to turn it off? If so then you
can do that and not worry about the mic, but you won't receive
calls.

[bad sector]

Post by bad sector
You may not understand it but the fact remains that there *is* a lot
of confusion and my take on it is that the reason for the confusion is
shitty design. There have been and continue occurring thousands of
live mic or phone incidents EVEN with well designed idiot-proof
LOW-TECH devices. Digital crap should have either a hard on/off switch
that does nothing else AND an easily removable battery. My flexphone
has half a dozen ways to be turned off and even when I will know them
all by heart they WILL NOT suffice. Having to trust that the OS has
turned the mic or itself off is not the answer

   I can understand the frustration. One reason that I don't normally
use a cellphone is because they're natural spyware devices. A second
reason is the complexity and lockdown. Both Google and Apple are
controlling their phones in ways that should be illegal. It's like buying
a toaster that only toasts Wonder Bread and calls home to report your
toasting operation... and that can't be disabled. Every time I turn my
cellphone on now I get a regular flurry of warnings that I should
enable Google something or other. That started when I accidentally
allowed it to update. It's a madhouse of commercial sleaze.
  Another issue relating to your trouble is simply that no one really
wants to turn their cellphone off. So it's designed to require some effort.
Turned off, you can't get calls. I only turn mine on when I want to
make a call, and the battery charge lasts for months. But I don't know
anyone else who does that. Everyone I know leaves it on constantly,
 letting it "sleep" when it's left idle. But cellphones don't actually
sleep.
Getting a call requires constant pings of nearby towers. So the cellphone
is always on. It's just the screen lights that go out.
  Given that scenario, having the mic turned on, or other such
intrusions, are a security issue, not an on/off issue, under typical
usage conditions.
  The ZFlip lists several methods to turn it off. But the first and
primary one is what people have been saying: "The easiest way
to turn off the Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 5 is to press and hold the
side and volume down buttons for about 3-5 seconds. When the
power settings show up, select Power off."
https://www.androidauthority.com/how-to-turn-off-samsung-galaxy-z-flip-5-3350350/

I know how to turn it off, for a number of reasons I finally settled on
the 3-step sequence beginning with sliding down the home page to the
notifications page. The entire OS sucks, being incoherent from A to Z.

 That's exactly how my TCL works. Though I only need to hold
the lower right button, whatever that's called. There's no ambiguity.
So the question is, do you REALLY want to turn it off? If so then you
can do that and not worry about the mic, but you won't receive
calls.

Not concerned about not receiving any calls, I've had enough spam
in the few months since I bought this zFlip5 to warrant just asking
callers to send me either a texto or an email. I'm actually looking for
a way to get my provider to not forward any voice messages at all
BEGINNING with their own fucking voice-mail or texto spam. Anyway, not
to diverge into futile tergiversation what interest me is not only ease
of turning off, a hard OFF switch and one-hand battery removal but
EQUALLY instant and unmistakable feedback confirming whenever the unit
is powered but in fact OFF.

[Arno Welzel]

Post by bad sector
The net is full of people having issues with phones they only thought
were OFF. My android Zflip is even worse that a simple conventional
design. Most times I turn it OFF/ON to be sure, there being no obvious,
bulletproof, always in your face, indication which should be a prerequisite.

Well - as long as you did not explicitely did POWER OFF the phone it is
not turned off. And "power off" means you press and HOLD the power
button until a menu appears where you can select to POWER OFF the
device. Just turning the display off by pressing the power buttons
briefly is not enough of course.

[bad sector]

Post by Arno Welzel

Post by bad sector
The net is full of people having issues with phones they only thought
were OFF. My android Zflip is even worse that a simple conventional
design. Most times I turn it OFF/ON to be sure, there being no obvious,
bulletproof, always in your face, indication which should be a prerequisite.

Well - as long as you did not explicitely did POWER OFF the phone it is
not turned off. And "power off" means you press and HOLD the power
button until a menu appears where you can select to POWER OFF the
device. Just turning the display off by pressing the power buttons
briefly is not enough of course.

There has been a bit of misunderstanding since my OP in which I raised
two issues. When I said "they only thought were OFF" I obviously meant
'on-hook' although an unwanted power-on state could in and of itself
also kill you in the wrong situation. After that MY workaround of
powering off TO ASSURE THAT IT IS ON-HOOK clouded the issue I think, but
both issues remain IMO extremely important all the time.

[Arno Welzel]

Post by bad sector

Post by Arno Welzel

Post by bad sector
The net is full of people having issues with phones they only thought
were OFF. My android Zflip is even worse that a simple conventional
design. Most times I turn it OFF/ON to be sure, there being no obvious,
bulletproof, always in your face, indication which should be a prerequisite.

Well - as long as you did not explicitely did POWER OFF the phone it is
not turned off. And "power off" means you press and HOLD the power
button until a menu appears where you can select to POWER OFF the
device. Just turning the display off by pressing the power buttons
briefly is not enough of course.

There has been a bit of misunderstanding since my OP in which I raised
two issues. When I said "they only thought were OFF" I obviously meant
'on-hook' although an unwanted power-on state could in and of itself
also kill you in the wrong situation. After that MY workaround of
powering off TO ASSURE THAT IT IS ON-HOOK clouded the issue I think, but
both issues remain IMO extremely important all the time.

I see - you refer to the question if there is a phone call still active
or unintentially started. Yes, unfortunately, smartphones usually don't
have dedicated "hang up" keys any longer except special models intended
to be used by older or disabled people.

However, when the phone app is still in an active call you should
usually also see a notification about this at the top of the screen.

[Frank Slootweg]

[...]

Post by Arno Welzel

Post by bad sector
There has been a bit of misunderstanding since my OP in which I raised
two issues. When I said "they only thought were OFF" I obviously meant
'on-hook' although an unwanted power-on state could in and of itself
also kill you in the wrong situation. After that MY workaround of
powering off TO ASSURE THAT IT IS ON-HOOK clouded the issue I think, but
both issues remain IMO extremely important all the time.

I see - you refer to the question if there is a phone call still active
or unintentially started. Yes, unfortunately, smartphones usually don't
have dedicated "hang up" keys any longer except special models intended
to be used by older or disabled people.

Are these scenarios even possible?

(AFAIK,) For a still active phone call: If the remote party 'hangs
up', the connection is terminated and the local phone will be 'on hook'
again.

For an unintentially started phone call: Unless the remote phone keeps
on ringing 'for ever' or switches to voice mail with 'endless'
recording, the call will be terminated at some stage and the local phone
will be 'on hook' again.

FWIW, I don't call or am called all that often (Using a smartphone as
a *phone*, what *will* they think of next! :-)), but I've never had a
situation where the phone was still 'off hook' without me knowing.

Post by Arno Welzel
However, when the phone app is still in an active call you should
usually also see a notification about this at the top of the screen.

I'll have to check how that is on my phone. I normally see the full
screen from the phone app, but have never tested what happens if I make
that go away without hanging up.

[bad sector]

Post by Frank Slootweg
[...]

Post by Arno Welzel

Post by bad sector
There has been a bit of misunderstanding since my OP in which I raised
two issues. When I said "they only thought were OFF" I obviously meant
'on-hook' although an unwanted power-on state could in and of itself
also kill you in the wrong situation. After that MY workaround of
powering off TO ASSURE THAT IT IS ON-HOOK clouded the issue I think, but
both issues remain IMO extremely important all the time.

I see - you refer to the question if there is a phone call still active
or unintentially started. Yes, unfortunately, smartphones usually don't
have dedicated "hang up" keys any longer except special models intended
to be used by older or disabled people.

Are these scenarios even possible?
(AFAIK,) For a still active phone call: If the remote party 'hangs
up', the connection is terminated and the local phone will be 'on hook'
again.

Once (when we were all driving used Chevvy-II's and Pintos with babies
in cribs or child seats) my sister-in-law got a call from her dad
telling her that they were welcome to visit any time (he lived on the
coast). She and her husband were very happy to hear that. But the old
fart kept failing to hang-up so several minutes after that call one of
them picked up the phone only to hear him say to someone physically
beside him "the Rockafellers are coming visiting".

A phone is also an emergency device, I'm not sure how I would call 911
with a hand also holding by belt as a tourniquet on the other arm,
busted up.

We need helluva more brains and bandwidth is the design and developmenmt
bureaus, les freakin' eye-candy and hype and more robust controls and
unmistakable feedback.

[Arno Welzel]

[...]

Post by bad sector

Post by Frank Slootweg
Are these scenarios even possible?
(AFAIK,) For a still active phone call: If the remote party 'hangs
up', the connection is terminated and the local phone will be 'on hook'
again.

Once (when we were all driving used Chevvy-II's and Pintos with babies
in cribs or child seats) my sister-in-law got a call from her dad
telling her that they were welcome to visit any time (he lived on the
coast). She and her husband were very happy to hear that. But the old
fart kept failing to hang-up so several minutes after that call one of
them picked up the phone only to hear him say to someone physically
beside him "the Rockafellers are coming visiting".

When they did not hang up, yes then this is possible - otherwise not.

[Frank Slootweg]

Post by Arno Welzel
[...]

Post by bad sector

Post by Frank Slootweg
Are these scenarios even possible?
(AFAIK,) For a still active phone call: If the remote party 'hangs
up', the connection is terminated and the local phone will be 'on hook'
again.

Once (when we were all driving used Chevvy-II's and Pintos with babies
in cribs or child seats) my sister-in-law got a call from her dad
telling her that they were welcome to visit any time (he lived on the
coast). She and her husband were very happy to hear that. But the old
fart kept failing to hang-up so several minutes after that call one of
them picked up the phone only to hear him say to someone physically
beside him "the Rockafellers are coming visiting".

When they did not hang up, yes then this is possible - otherwise not.

But that was a scenario with a normal (not mobile) phone with a
seperate handpiece/receiver (we Dutch call it the 'hoorn' (horn). As I
mentioned, (AFAIK, for the reasons I gave) such a scenario is not
possible for a smartphone (and probably also not for most 'dumb'/feature
phones).

My take is that 'bad sector' just wants to ramble/vent.

[bad💽sector]

Post by Frank Slootweg

Post by Arno Welzel
[...]

Post by bad sector

Post by Frank Slootweg
Are these scenarios even possible?
(AFAIK,) For a still active phone call: If the remote party 'hangs
up', the connection is terminated and the local phone will be 'on hook'
again.

Once (when we were all driving used Chevvy-II's and Pintos with babies
in cribs or child seats) my sister-in-law got a call from her dad
telling her that they were welcome to visit any time (he lived on the
coast). She and her husband were very happy to hear that. But the old
fart kept failing to hang-up so several minutes after that call one of
them picked up the phone only to hear him say to someone physically
beside him "the Rockafellers are coming visiting".

When they did not hang up, yes then this is possible - otherwise not.

But that was a scenario with a normal (not mobile) phone with a
seperate handpiece/receiver (we Dutch call it the 'hoorn' (horn). As I
mentioned, (AFAIK, for the reasons I gave) such a scenario is not
possible for a smartphone (and probably also not for most 'dumb'/feature
phones).
My take is that 'bad sector' just wants to ramble/vent.

Not really, what I want is CHANGE. The BlackBerry had not only real
buttons but chicklety ones extremely well engineeered for that positive
feel. My son had one, they *were disappeared* just when I was getting
set to buy one! I had to do with a basic cell-phone with no texto even.
I did what I needed done but a while ago it packed up so I wanted to buy
another one like it but with texto capability. My provider said
"FORGET-IT, we've been keeping your special low-end account for as long
as you phone would last, now it's NOT renewable anymore". So I went and
bought this android zFlip5 but it's a giga-letdown for too many reasons
to mention and I think I will get rid of it. I can live without a
cell-phone, my take is that demand will eventually force design
improvements as well as open source non-proprietary OS'es developed by
units walking on two legs. Meanwhile I call a spade a spade and I will
let no apple, faecesbook or goongle steer my life, they already have way
too much influence on my bowel movements.

tinyurl.com/3s7bkhw7

[Frank Slootweg]

[...]

Post by bad💽sector

Post by Frank Slootweg
My take is that 'bad sector' just wants to ramble/vent.

Not really, what I want is CHANGE. The BlackBerry had not only real
buttons but chicklety ones extremely well engineeered for that positive
feel. My son had one, they *were disappeared* just when I was getting
set to buy one! I had to do with a basic cell-phone with no texto even.
I did what I needed done but a while ago it packed up so I wanted to buy
another one like it but with texto capability. My provider said
"FORGET-IT, we've been keeping your special low-end account for as long
as you phone would last, now it's NOT renewable anymore". So I went and
bought this android zFlip5 but it's a giga-letdown for too many reasons
to mention and I think I will get rid of it. I can live without a
cell-phone, my take is that demand will eventually force design
improvements as well as open source non-proprietary OS'es developed by
units walking on two legs. Meanwhile I call a spade a spade and I will
let no apple, faecesbook or goongle steer my life, they already have way
too much influence on my bowel movements.
tinyurl.com/3s7bkhw7

As I've said to others with similar needs/wants/complaints:

Buy a 'dumb'/'feature' phone and be done with it. They still have real
keys/ buttons. have SMS capability and can work on modern 4G (and of
course 2G and 3G) networks. Problem solved.

[bad💽sector]

Post by Frank Slootweg
[...]

Post by bad💽sector

Post by Frank Slootweg
My take is that 'bad sector' just wants to ramble/vent.

Not really, what I want is CHANGE. The BlackBerry had not only real
buttons but chicklety ones extremely well engineeered for that positive
feel. My son had one, they *were disappeared* just when I was getting
set to buy one! I had to do with a basic cell-phone with no texto even.
I did what I needed done but a while ago it packed up so I wanted to buy
another one like it but with texto capability. My provider said
"FORGET-IT, we've been keeping your special low-end account for as long
as you phone would last, now it's NOT renewable anymore". So I went and
bought this android zFlip5 but it's a giga-letdown for too many reasons
to mention and I think I will get rid of it. I can live without a
cell-phone, my take is that demand will eventually force design
improvements as well as open source non-proprietary OS'es developed by
units walking on two legs. Meanwhile I call a spade a spade and I will
let no apple, faecesbook or goongle steer my life, they already have way
too much influence on my bowel movements.
tinyurl.com/3s7bkhw7

Buy a 'dumb'/'feature' phone and be done with it. They still have real
keys/ buttons. have SMS capability and can work on modern 4G (and of
course 2G and 3G) networks. Problem solved.

Other than satellite, where I live there are only 3 providers one of
which (Bell) doesn't even have my physical address in their data base so
when I call them they say "you do not exist". The other big one (Telus)
is the only major that is available on paper but with only 4g service
and so poor as to make the entire idea of a cell-phone laughable,
tethering is a joke that NEVER works. The third one is a discount arm of
Telus selling their crap for a few pennies less. I'm only saying this to
put things into perspective. Telus as I said will NOT renew my old
plane-jane service for a plain-jane flip phone fare, I have no choice
but to go with the minimal but hefty price of full 5g and tethering
package very little of which could I use with ANY phone and almost none
of which with less. Bottom line, if I have service at all be that
minimally high-end on paper, I might as well have the phone for it.

Problem 'solving' would BEGIN with stomping on the manufacturers' and
providers' balls with both feet and forcing them into line or lose their
market or licenses. Unfortunately our barbie-boy leader always sits with
his legs crossed.

[Frank Slootweg]

Post by bad💽sector

Post by Frank Slootweg
[...]

Post by bad💽sector

Post by Frank Slootweg
My take is that 'bad sector' just wants to ramble/vent.

Not really, what I want is CHANGE. The BlackBerry had not only real
buttons but chicklety ones extremely well engineeered for that positive
feel. My son had one, they *were disappeared* just when I was getting
set to buy one! I had to do with a basic cell-phone with no texto even.
I did what I needed done but a while ago it packed up so I wanted to buy
another one like it but with texto capability. My provider said
"FORGET-IT, we've been keeping your special low-end account for as long
as you phone would last, now it's NOT renewable anymore". So I went and
bought this android zFlip5 but it's a giga-letdown for too many reasons
to mention and I think I will get rid of it. I can live without a
cell-phone, my take is that demand will eventually force design
improvements as well as open source non-proprietary OS'es developed by
units walking on two legs. Meanwhile I call a spade a spade and I will
let no apple, faecesbook or goongle steer my life, they already have way
too much influence on my bowel movements.
tinyurl.com/3s7bkhw7

Buy a 'dumb'/'feature' phone and be done with it. They still have real
keys/ buttons. have SMS capability and can work on modern 4G (and of
course 2G and 3G) networks. Problem solved.

Other than satellite, where I live there are only 3 providers one of
which (Bell) doesn't even have my physical address in their data base so
when I call them they say "you do not exist". The other big one (Telus)
is the only major that is available on paper but with only 4g service
and so poor as to make the entire idea of a cell-phone laughable,
tethering is a joke that NEVER works. The third one is a discount arm of
Telus selling their crap for a few pennies less. I'm only saying this to
put things into perspective. Telus as I said will NOT renew my old
plane-jane service for a plain-jane flip phone fare, I have no choice
but to go with the minimal but hefty price of full 5g and tethering
package very little of which could I use with ANY phone and almost none
of which with less. Bottom line, if I have service at all be that
minimally high-end on paper, I might as well have the phone for it.

If you tell the audience where (about) you live, they probably can
give you some sensible and reasonable cost alternative providers,
possibly/probably 'even' some prepaid ones.

Meanwhile we in the read world - meaning non-US or maybe non-NA - have
no such problems. How I use or do not use my phone is no-one's business,
I only pay my provider(s) for what I need/use. End of story.

Post by bad💽sector
Problem 'solving' would BEGIN with stomping on the manufacturers' and
providers' balls with both feet and forcing them into line or lose their
market or licenses. Unfortunately our barbie-boy leader always sits with
his legs crossed.

[bad💽sector]

Post by Frank Slootweg

Post by bad💽sector

Post by Frank Slootweg
[...]

Post by bad💽sector

Post by Frank Slootweg
My take is that 'bad sector' just wants to ramble/vent.

Not really, what I want is CHANGE. The BlackBerry had not only real
buttons but chicklety ones extremely well engineeered for that positive
feel. My son had one, they *were disappeared* just when I was getting
set to buy one! I had to do with a basic cell-phone with no texto even.
I did what I needed done but a while ago it packed up so I wanted to buy
another one like it but with texto capability. My provider said
"FORGET-IT, we've been keeping your special low-end account for as long
as you phone would last, now it's NOT renewable anymore". So I went and
bought this android zFlip5 but it's a giga-letdown for too many reasons
to mention and I think I will get rid of it. I can live without a
cell-phone, my take is that demand will eventually force design
improvements as well as open source non-proprietary OS'es developed by
units walking on two legs. Meanwhile I call a spade a spade and I will
let no apple, faecesbook or goongle steer my life, they already have way
too much influence on my bowel movements.
tinyurl.com/3s7bkhw7

Buy a 'dumb'/'feature' phone and be done with it. They still have real
keys/ buttons. have SMS capability and can work on modern 4G (and of
course 2G and 3G) networks. Problem solved.

Other than satellite, where I live there are only 3 providers one of
which (Bell) doesn't even have my physical address in their data base so
when I call them they say "you do not exist". The other big one (Telus)
is the only major that is available on paper but with only 4g service
and so poor as to make the entire idea of a cell-phone laughable,
tethering is a joke that NEVER works. The third one is a discount arm of
Telus selling their crap for a few pennies less. I'm only saying this to
put things into perspective. Telus as I said will NOT renew my old
plane-jane service for a plain-jane flip phone fare, I have no choice
but to go with the minimal but hefty price of full 5g and tethering
package very little of which could I use with ANY phone and almost none
of which with less. Bottom line, if I have service at all be that
minimally high-end on paper, I might as well have the phone for it.

If you tell the audience where (about) you live, they probably can
give you some sensible and reasonable cost alternative providers,
possibly/probably 'even' some prepaid ones.
Meanwhile we in the read world - meaning non-US or maybe non-NA - have
no such problems. How I use or do not use my phone is no-one's business,
I only pay my provider(s) for what I need/use. End of story.

I live in eastern Quebec and our two levels of government can't even
spell "utility price controls" the way they do in Europe where unlimited
4g plans are about 20 euros from what I hear. But cost is NOT the issue
nor the topic which is "is my smartphone ON or OFF including on-hook
off" conditions which IMO are not that obvious all the time nor is their
setting as simple and intuitive as it could and should be.

When designing something as important as a communications tool or its OS
for the masses you sit down with a number of people who have never used
a cell phone and give them one asking 'is that phone ON or is it OFF
right now as it is'? In the event of no answer or a wrong answer it's
back to the drawing board UNTIL YOU GET IT RIGHT! Ditto for putting
on-hook or turning off without reading any manual in which context I
also want to see removable batteries.

I'm not looking to use providers whose head offices do not fall under
Canadian law. As I said there are 3 domestic ones here at least
theoretically available to me, all of them suck and a 4th one which I
haven't named gets such bad reports that I wouldn't even use them if
THEY paid ME.

Post by Frank Slootweg

Post by bad💽sector
Problem 'solving' would BEGIN with stomping on the manufacturers' and
providers' balls with both feet and forcing them into line or lose their
market or licenses. Unfortunately our barbie-boy leader always sits with
his legs crossed.

[Frank Slootweg]

Post by bad💽sector

Post by Frank Slootweg

Post by bad💽sector

Post by Frank Slootweg
[...]

Post by bad💽sector

Post by Frank Slootweg
My take is that 'bad sector' just wants to ramble/vent.

Not really, what I want is CHANGE. The BlackBerry had not only real
buttons but chicklety ones extremely well engineeered for that positive
feel. My son had one, they *were disappeared* just when I was getting
set to buy one! I had to do with a basic cell-phone with no texto even.
I did what I needed done but a while ago it packed up so I wanted to buy
another one like it but with texto capability. My provider said
"FORGET-IT, we've been keeping your special low-end account for as long
as you phone would last, now it's NOT renewable anymore". So I went and
bought this android zFlip5 but it's a giga-letdown for too many reasons
to mention and I think I will get rid of it. I can live without a
cell-phone, my take is that demand will eventually force design
improvements as well as open source non-proprietary OS'es developed by
units walking on two legs. Meanwhile I call a spade a spade and I will
let no apple, faecesbook or goongle steer my life, they already have way
too much influence on my bowel movements.
tinyurl.com/3s7bkhw7

Buy a 'dumb'/'feature' phone and be done with it. They still have real
keys/ buttons. have SMS capability and can work on modern 4G (and of
course 2G and 3G) networks. Problem solved.

Other than satellite, where I live there are only 3 providers one of
which (Bell) doesn't even have my physical address in their data base so
when I call them they say "you do not exist". The other big one (Telus)
is the only major that is available on paper but with only 4g service
and so poor as to make the entire idea of a cell-phone laughable,
tethering is a joke that NEVER works. The third one is a discount arm of
Telus selling their crap for a few pennies less. I'm only saying this to
put things into perspective. Telus as I said will NOT renew my old
plane-jane service for a plain-jane flip phone fare, I have no choice
but to go with the minimal but hefty price of full 5g and tethering
package very little of which could I use with ANY phone and almost none
of which with less. Bottom line, if I have service at all be that
minimally high-end on paper, I might as well have the phone for it.

If you tell the audience where (about) you live, they probably can
give you some sensible and reasonable cost alternative providers,
possibly/probably 'even' some prepaid ones.
Meanwhile we in the read world - meaning non-US or maybe non-NA - have
no such problems. How I use or do not use my phone is no-one's business,
I only pay my provider(s) for what I need/use. End of story.

I live in eastern Quebec and our two levels of government can't even
spell "utility price controls" the way they do in Europe where unlimited
4g plans are about 20 euros from what I hear.

Why do you need an unlimited plan if you only want/need cals and SMS?

Post by bad💽sector
But cost is NOT the issue
nor the topic which is "is my smartphone ON or OFF including on-hook
off" conditions which IMO are not that obvious all the time nor is their
setting as simple and intuitive as it could and should be.
When designing something as important as a communications tool or its OS
for the masses you sit down with a number of people who have never used
a cell phone and give them one asking 'is that phone ON or is it OFF
right now as it is'? In the event of no answer or a wrong answer it's
back to the drawing board UNTIL YOU GET IT RIGHT! Ditto for putting
on-hook or turning off without reading any manual in which context I
also want to see removable batteries.

As I mentioned - and neither you nor anybody else debunked -, with
smartphones, 'dumb' phones and even 'cordless' ('landline') phones,
there *is* no on-hook/off-hook problem scenario.

The on/off demand is unsolvable (without instructions/a_manual), i.e.
unrealistic. It's unsolvable for many/most devices, so why would a
mobile phone be different?

As to (easily, user) removable batteries: Don't hold your breath.

Bottom line:

[Rewind/repeat:]

Post by bad💽sector

Post by Frank Slootweg

Post by bad💽sector

Post by Frank Slootweg

Post by bad💽sector

Post by Frank Slootweg
My take is that 'bad sector' just wants to ramble/vent.

[Resume:]

Post by bad💽sector
I'm not looking to use providers whose head offices do not fall under
Canadian law. As I said there are 3 domestic ones here at least
theoretically available to me, all of them suck and a 4th one which I
haven't named gets such bad reports that I wouldn't even use them if
THEY paid ME.

There are some Canadian posters in the smartphone groups who could
probably help with finding a Canadian provider, probably a MVNO (Mobile
Virtual Network Operator), but as far as I know, they're iPhone users,
so not likely to follow this group, unless crossposted.

Post by bad💽sector

Post by Frank Slootweg

Post by bad💽sector
Problem 'solving' would BEGIN with stomping on the manufacturers' and
providers' balls with both feet and forcing them into line or lose their
market or licenses. Unfortunately our barbie-boy leader always sits with
his legs crossed.

[bad sector]

Post by Frank Slootweg
Why do you need an unlimited plan if you only want/need cals and SMS?

I need a wifi hotspot because my internet provider is in a transition
period with tons of outages, unfortunately except for brief periods my
expensive smartphone wifi acces is useless too. This issue should
resolve before year's end but I will still need a wide band backup of
some capacity.

Post by Frank Slootweg

Post by bad💽sector
But cost is NOT the issue
nor the topic which is "is my smartphone ON or OFF including on-hook
off" conditions which IMO are not that obvious all the time nor is their
setting as simple and intuitive as it could and should be.
When designing something as important as a communications tool or its OS
for the masses you sit down with a number of people who have never used
a cell phone and give them one asking 'is that phone ON or is it OFF
right now as it is'? In the event of no answer or a wrong answer it's
back to the drawing board UNTIL YOU GET IT RIGHT! Ditto for putting
on-hook or turning off without reading any manual in which context I
also want to see removable batteries.

As I mentioned - and neither you nor anybody else debunked -, with
smartphones, 'dumb' phones and even 'cordless' ('landline') phones,
there *is* no on-hook/off-hook problem scenario.
The on/off demand is unsolvable (without instructions/a_manual)

No it isn't. Motion sensor and a LOUD display briefly flashing "ON" on
all screens so no display means it's OFF. No one needs a manual for that
much.

Post by Frank Slootweg
As to (easily, user) removable batteries: Don't hold your breath.

No problemo, in fact I will sleep just as well if smart phones anf half
of humanity vanish altogether but meanwhile I accept one of only two
constraints and that with respect to just about anything: feasability
and demand. These features are doable, demand will decide the rest.
Those that can't keep up with the fast dogs should stay home on the
porch like those carmakers who once said that electric starters needed
large batteries and were for women only anyway.

[Frank Slootweg]

[...]

Post by bad sector

Post by Frank Slootweg
The on/off demand is unsolvable (without instructions/a_manual)

No it isn't. Motion sensor and a LOUD display briefly flashing "ON" on
all screens so no display means it's OFF. No one needs a manual for that
much.

But that assumes that the user touches/moves the device. Not an
unreasonable assumption, but an assumption nonetheless.

BTW, you'll be delighted to hear that my Samsung (Galaxy A51) does
essentially that, i.e. the display lights up when I 'pick up' the phone.
Also when kept stationary, for example lying on a table, touching the
display, lights it up ('Always on' display).

Post by bad sector

Post by Frank Slootweg
As to (easily, user) removable batteries: Don't hold your breath.

No problemo, in fact I will sleep just as well if smart phones anf half
of humanity vanish altogether but meanwhile I accept one of only two
constraints and that with respect to just about anything: feasability
and demand. These features are doable, demand will decide the rest.

Yes, (easily, user) removable batteries are doable, but - as already
mentioned - it has it's constraints and disadvantages. Nothing in this
world has only advantages and removable batteries are no exception to
this law.

BTW, don't get me wrong, I'm all in favour of (easily, user) removable
batteries. I had them in my ('dumb' and smart) phones and laptops, but
now have to do without.

[bad💽sector]

Post by Frank Slootweg
[...]

Post by bad sector

Post by Frank Slootweg
The on/off demand is unsolvable (without instructions/a_manual)

No it isn't. Motion sensor and a LOUD display briefly flashing "ON" on
all screens so no display means it's OFF. No one needs a manual for that
much.

But that assumes that the user touches/moves the device. Not an
unreasonable assumption, but an assumption nonetheless.
BTW, you'll be delighted to hear that my Samsung (Galaxy A51) does
essentially that, i.e. the display lights up when I 'pick up' the phone.
Also when kept stationary, for example lying on a table, touching the
display, lights it up ('Always on' display).

Post by bad sector

Post by Frank Slootweg
As to (easily, user) removable batteries: Don't hold your breath.

No problemo, in fact I will sleep just as well if smart phones anf half
of humanity vanish altogether but meanwhile I accept one of only two
constraints and that with respect to just about anything: feasability
and demand. These features are doable, demand will decide the rest.

Yes, (easily, user) removable batteries are doable, but - as already
mentioned - it has it's constraints and disadvantages. Nothing in this
world has only advantages and removable batteries are no exception to
this law.
BTW, don't get me wrong, I'm all in favour of (easily, user) removable
batteries. I had them in my ('dumb' and smart) phones and laptops, but
now have to do without.

What the mass of users or the regulatory acting for them want or are
prepared to put up with is evidently the ultimate deciding factor. What
I do NOT accept is minoritary influences representing only themselves
deciding to include/exclude any feature. It's like should cell-phones
disable themselves within XYZ feet of a car with a runing engine? IMO
they should. Will the using masses or their regulatory insist on it? IMO
they will not because they're too pucking stupid, and so the brainless
chaff WILL continue thinning its own ranks, natural selection at its
evangelical very best :-)

[bad sector]

Post by Arno Welzel

Post by bad sector

Post by Arno Welzel

Post by bad sector
The net is full of people having issues with phones they only thought
were OFF. My android Zflip is even worse that a simple conventional
design. Most times I turn it OFF/ON to be sure, there being no obvious,
bulletproof, always in your face, indication which should be a prerequisite.

Well - as long as you did not explicitely did POWER OFF the phone it is
not turned off. And "power off" means you press and HOLD the power
button until a menu appears where you can select to POWER OFF the
device. Just turning the display off by pressing the power buttons
briefly is not enough of course.

There has been a bit of misunderstanding since my OP in which I raised
two issues. When I said "they only thought were OFF" I obviously meant
'on-hook' although an unwanted power-on state could in and of itself
also kill you in the wrong situation. After that MY workaround of
powering off TO ASSURE THAT IT IS ON-HOOK clouded the issue I think, but
both issues remain IMO extremely important all the time.

I see - you refer to the question if there is a phone call still active
or unintentially started. Yes, unfortunately, smartphones usually don't
have dedicated "hang up" keys any longer except special models intended
to be used by older or disabled people.
However, when the phone app is still in an active call you should
usually also see a notification about this at the top of the screen.

In this day and age of (even apolitical) globalization and cultural
babylon it no longer suffices for communication to be understandable,
communication must henceforth be impossible to misunderstand. The phone
(supposedly) is trying to communicate to the user *vitally important*
information at the top of which list figure power and connection or line
states. If this is not an unconditional success at the level of both
facilitation and communication, and IMO it most certainly is not, I can
see two reasons for that: intentional virtualization distancing the user
from real control and awareness or incompetent hardware/software design
by fucktards (of the kind that we see in cars more every day).