Arno Welzel wrote:
Only one in a million people know how to set up Android to not show ads.
Just not using apps with Ads? Or would that be too easy? ;-)
Hi Arno,
Good point! Touche
I will never disagree with any logically sensible viewpoint.
Only fools do that. That's why they're fools.
While we disagree on philosophy sometimes, most of the time we agree on the facts, where I do agree with you, much as I'd agree with anyone who
presents a logically defensible point of view, that the *easiest* solution
is simply not to load apps that have ads.
This is easy to do even for the hoi polloi given every app must declare whether or not it contains ads.
However, I think the point of the original article was that many app developers incorporate Google SDKs which, according to the article,
secretly record your GPS location and report it to the Google ad servers.
Arno Welzel wrote:
OSMAnd also has a *paid* subscription to support their work, even when
the app itself is free and can be downloaded for free as well.
OSMAnd~/OSMAnd+ has both a free and paid version, as you're well aware.
I've used OSMAnd~ but I find it inferior to other solutions, even as I do very much love that it's an open source project, even for the map
database.
Just like most people would pay the Mafia not to burn down their buildings. >>I don't. But I have to pay my landlord for the rent and also for
electricity, water and internet access. Are all these companies
"Mafia"?
Arno Welzel wrote:
OSMAnd also has a *paid* subscription to support their work, even when
the app itself is free and can be downloaded for free as well.
OSMAnd~/OSMAnd+ has both a free and paid version, as you're well aware.
I've used OSMAnd~ but I find it inferior to other solutions, even as I do very much love that it's an open source project, even for the map database.
Why is it "absurd" to use paid apps which don't have ads instead of
using "free" versions which show ads to generate income for the developers?
The instant you 'pay' for anything on the net, you have lost your privacy.
I don't. But I have to pay my landlord for the rent and also for
electricity, water and internet access. Are all these companies "Mafia"?
Well, I get my Internet for free but you're not paying those companies to give you a product sans ads, so I don't think the example is appropriate.
I can install an ad-supported app and it works fine, just without ads.
Yes, but then you don't remove ads, you just stop the apps to show them.
The whole location spying code is then still installed.
You think I'm only using ad blocking VPN settings, but it's more than that. My phone is literally physically incapable of ever showing a single ad.
Only one in a million people know how to do that, and, even I would be hard pressed to list the things I had to do to make my phone incapable of ads.
The proof though, which took me many hours to test about two or three
months ago, is that none of the ad-serving packages are left on my system.
OSMAnd+ when you can get OSMAnd~ for free, and, I've often said on this
very newsgroup that it's stupid to pay for OSMAnd+ even when what your goal might be to reward the developers.
Why pay Google their percent if your real goal is rewarding the developers? It's just stupid.
IMHO, anyone paying for OSMAnd+ who says they're doing it to "reward the developers" is not doing what they think they're doing since I'm sure there are plenty of ways to reward the developers WITHOUT Google getting a cut.
Maria Sophia, 2026-08-16 20:26:
[...]> But my point was paying the rent is completely different than
paying for
OSMAnd+ when you can get OSMAnd~ for free, and, I've often said on this
very newsgroup that it's stupid to pay for OSMAnd+ even when what your goal >> might be to reward the developers.
Why pay Google their percent if your real goal is rewarding the developers? >> It's just stupid.
But the developers accept this - they offer to use Google for the subscription and Google gets their percent to run the infrastructure and handle the payment processing. Still the developers get money.
IMHO, anyone paying for OSMAnd+ who says they're doing it to "reward the
developers" is not doing what they think they're doing since I'm sure there >> are plenty of ways to reward the developers WITHOUT Google getting a cut.
Yes - but you still need an account for this:
<https://osmand.net/pricing>
Maria Sophia, 2026-08-15 19:05:
Arno Welzel wrote:
[...]
What does "physically incapable" mean? The display is modified, so the
area, where ads would get displayed, is missing? Or it does not have
internet connection and you only can install apps by copying the APK
files to it via USB? You patched the operating system?
Only one in a million people know how to do that, and, even I would be hard >> pressed to list the things I had to do to make my phone incapable of ads.
The proof though, which took me many hours to test about two or three
months ago, is that none of the ad-serving packages are left on my system.
Well, if it took you many hours, you may show others how its done - for example by publishing an article on a website and posting the link here.
At least this would give a bit back to the society you have taken it from.
Arno Welzel wrote:
I can install an ad-supported app and it works fine, just without ads.
And you steal other peoples work. The deal is, that the app is for free,
since the people offering the app get their payment through the apps. If
you don't want to pay, just don't use these apps at all. If you still
use it, you take something without letting people get paid for it.
AJL wrote:
I can install an ad-supported app and it works fine, just without ads.
And you steal other peoples work. The deal is, that the app is for free, >>>> since the people offering the app get their payment through the apps. If >>>> you don't want to pay, just don't use these apps at all. If you still
use it, you take something without letting people get paid for it.
I use an Android app called Reading Mode. On virtually any browser or app
page it strips off everything but the main text, including the ads. Am I
also stealing other people's work?
It's clear you've never taken logic,
whereas in my logic classes decades
ago, as an undergraduate, your argument clearly puts forth a non sequitur >based on a false equivalence.
Your basic assumption that intelligent people must be stealing because they >can legally do things that unintelligent people can't do, is absurd.
The developer may have a legitimate business expectation that users will
see ads, but that is not the same thing as establishing that a user has
taken property without permission, which is what stealing ordinarily means.
The simple fact that intelligent people don't ever see ads is not stealing.
It's the same argument Apple religious zealots make all the time.
The fact they can't figure out how to use an app is not stealing.
They hate that they see ads.
I love that I never see ads.
The difference?
Intelligence.
Between just you and me, anyone who believes anything Apple marketing tells >them to believe is an idiot. All the Apple religious zealots are parrots.
In the case of sd card, anyone saying they're "obsolete" certainly lacks
the ability to make logical assessments, don't you think?
AJL wrote:
Between just you and me, anyone who believes anything Apple marketing tells >them to believe is an idiot. All the Apple religious zealots are parrots.
Dunno about marketing but the 4 Apple devices (2 tablets: mini and biggie, >> watch, and phone) that live in my house have always worked just fine.
It's hard for me to respond that "Apple devices work just fine", because I >too have Apple devices & fer' sure they can't do half of what Android does.
As far as anyone on the Apple newsgroups has ever been able to figure out >over the years, there's only a single thing iOS does that Android can't.
Like you, I use the sd card to offload my "data" such as the WhatsApp
videos of the grandkids, which I copy from internal storage to sd storage.
IMHO, the only reason to remove sd functionality is to force people to be
so desperate as to feel the need to buy all the missing functionality back.
Yes. I use SD car ds to sideload my stored apks to my new tablet toys
and
also for my music when a tablet doesn't have enough internal memory for my
2K+ songs. Surprisingly this Chromebook I'm posting with doesn't even have
an SD slot. Guess ACER thinks they're getting obsolete? But I just use an
adapter when necessary. No biggie...
AJL <noemail@none.com> wrote:
I use SD cards to sideload my stored apks to my new tablet toys
If this is for an Android-to-Android transfer, you might want to have
a look at Android's 'Quick Share'
Surprisingly this Chromebook I'm posting with doesn't even have
an SD slot. Guess ACER thinks they're getting obsolete? But I just use an adapter.
You mean you can even use SD-cards on devices which do not have a
SD-slot!? Technology never seizes to amaze me!
Arno Welzel wrote:
I've used OSMAnd~ but I find it inferior to other solutions, even as I do >>> very much love that it's an open source project, even for the map database. >>If its only inferior, because you don't want to pay for OSMAnd+, you may
try to check it out. The subscription can be cancelled any time and is
only around 5.99 EUR per year(!).
But how do you get your privacy back once you've lost it by the account?
So you don't use anything at all which can not be paid with cash? YouWhy is it "absurd" to use paid apps which don't have ads instead of
using "free" versions which show ads to generate income for the developers?
The instant you 'pay' for anything on the net, you have lost your privacy. >>
can get Google Play cards in shops - for cash - and use them to pay for
apps.
Well, I do use a Costco VISA, so it's not that I don't pay for anything.
since the people offering the app get their payment through the apps. If
you don't want to pay, just don't use these apps at all. If you still
use it, you take something without letting people get paid for it.
Hmmm... I'm going to have a difficult time explaining to you without
hurting your feelings why your "attitude" is so wrong as to be absurd.
Maria Sophia, 2026-08-15 19:05:
Arno Welzel wrote:
[...]
OSMAnd also has a *paid* subscription to support their work, even when
the app itself is free and can be downloaded for free as well.
OSMAnd~/OSMAnd+ has both a free and paid version, as you're well aware.
I've used OSMAnd~ but I find it inferior to other solutions, even as I do
very much love that it's an open source project, even for the map database.
If its only inferior, because you don't want to pay for OSMAnd+, you may
try to check it out. The subscription can be cancelled any time and is
only around 5.99 EUR per year(!).
[...]
Why is it "absurd" to use paid apps which don't have ads instead ofThe instant you 'pay' for anything on the net, you have lost your privacy.
using "free" versions which show ads to generate income for the developers? >>
So you don't use anything at all which can not be paid with cash? You
can get Google Play cards in shops - for cash - and use them to pay for
apps.
AJL <noemail@none.com> wrote:
[...]
Yes. I use SD car ds to sideload my stored apks to my new tablet toys
If this is for an Android-to-Android transfer, you might want to have
a look at Android's 'Quick Share' sharing facility (previously
Samsung-only, now part of Android). Quick Share handles transfers of
files and folders via Internet, i.e. local Wi-Fi or mobile data.
A certain poster will be pleased to know that Quick Share also has
Apple AirDrop functionality, so the Walled Garden has yet another hole
in it.
and
also for my music when a tablet doesn't have enough internal memory for my >> 2K+ songs. Surprisingly this Chromebook I'm posting with doesn't even have >> an SD slot. Guess ACER thinks they're getting obsolete? But I just use an >> adapter when necessary. No biggie...
You mean you can even use SD-cards on devices which do not have a
SD-slot!? Technology never seizes to amaze me!
On 8/20/26 11:30 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:[...]
You mean you can even use SD-cards on devices which do not have a
SD-slot!? Technology never seizes to amaze me!
And some sarcasm also never ceases to amaze me... ;)
On 2026-08-20, Frank Slootweg wrote:
AJL <noemail@none.com> wrote:
[...]
Yes. I use SD car ds to sideload my stored apks to my new tablet toys
If this is for an Android-to-Android transfer, you might want to have
a look at Android's 'Quick Share' sharing facility (previously Samsung-only, now part of Android). Quick Share handles transfers of
files and folders via Internet, i.e. local Wi-Fi or mobile data.
A certain poster will be pleased to know that Quick Share also has
Apple AirDrop functionality, so the Walled Garden has yet another hole
in it.
What I've found on Android (also not well labeled, I guess, given that
it didn't present itself as an Android feature, and could well be a less trustable preinstalled third-party app...), was something that did not compare to Samsung's own wifi-based transfer, as "Quick Share" seemed to require Bluetooth? I may have overlooked something, for sure...
(At the same time, Android 15 couldn't accept a file transfer over
Bluetooth proper!?)
AJL wrote:
since most of my long saved apks are for earlier versions of Android and
fast becoming obsolete (like Groundhog) I think I'll just get out of the
apk business altogether and just use the (gasp) Play Store.
Overall, I don't seem to have much of a problem getting older APKs to work. >But I'm on Android 13, and on Samsung, so, maybe that's why the difference?
AJL wrote:
It's hard for me to respond that "Apple devices work just fine", because I >too have Apple devices & fer' sure they can't do half of what Android does.
It depends on the user's needs. The user in my house is satisfied.
I actually disagree with you on that, but I fully understand why you
"think" they're happy, and, even, they think they're happy.
Lately I just download stuff from my Google Drive. Thanks Google for
making downloading things so much easier.
I don't disagree that the highly marketed solutions are EASY to use.
They're designed to push you down a slide that they chose for you.
No big deal for me. I haven't needed it [SD card] on my phone for years. And on the
Chromebook adapters are easy to use. And of course Google Drive is even
easier to use (if you have the download time of course)...
What always amazes me is how well Marketing works on people...
AJL <noemail@none.com> wrote:
On 8/20/26 11:30 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
You mean you can even use SD-cards on devices which do not have a >>>SD-slot!? Technology never seizes to amaze me!
And some sarcasm also never ceases to amaze me... ;)
But that Google Translate did not spot my spelling error, does amaze
me. (It looked 'weird' when I typed it, so I fed it to Google Translate.
But hey, if Google says it's OK, it must be OK! NOT!)
AJL wrote:
I'm mainly a news junkie
What sites do you like to get your news?
I get my news on Windows via a web browser
I also require my news to be balanced, just like I am, which means Fox news >is out of the question, as is MSNBC, or Al Jazeira for that matter.
AJL wrote
You may be a bit less happy when you find out what Google is doing at this >very moment to make sideloading even apps from the play store miserable.
<https://i.postimg.cc/4dj6YnZw/photo-2026-08-22-10-07-15.jpg>
Now my Amazon tablets did have ads on the lock screen. You could pay to keep >>them off but I kinda liked them as they were geared toward me. Cmon Google >>decorate my lock screen...
I don't have a lock screen, per se (it's just a clock) but I get it that >sometimes, if the ad lowers the price, I might even buy the object. Maybe.
I don't need a trailer on my car either cause it carries all I need. No >>marketing involved...
What amazes me is people think they didn't pay for the extra internal
storage in their car trunk, specifically so that they could "erroneously" >claim they don't need the extra trailer.
I also require my news to be balanced, just like I am, which means Fox news >is out of the question, as is MSNBC, or Al Jazeira for that matter.
Fox News is like listening to the Pope tell us the news, while MSNBC is
like listening to a high-ranking Mormon bishop deliver a Sunday sermon on >social equity,
and Al Jazeera is like listening to an embassy press
secretary reading a foreign policy brief translated through a state-run >filter.
If you look at Ground News or any of the other balance checkers, they're so >unbalanced in terms of news
as to be like being on an Apple Usenet ng. :)
I also require my news to be balanced, just like I am, which means Fox news >is out of the question, as is MSNBC, or Al Jazeira for that matter.
The most uninformed people on the planet, are those who listen only to the >news that fits their own personal bias.
If you can tell what the announcer thinks, it's not news.
If someone listens to news and does NOT know the bias of that news, then
it's just entertainment, and not news.
HINT: If you can tell what the announcer thinks, it's not news.
For example, MSNBC & FOX NEWS are not news. They're entertainment.
Arno Welzel wrote:
But how do you get your privacy back once you've lost it by the account?
I did not loose my privacy by having an account to pay.
Heh heh heh... yet you did.
On 2026-08-18, Arno Welzel wrote:
Maria Sophia, 2026-08-15 19:05:
Arno Welzel wrote:
[...]
If its only inferior, because you don't want to pay for OSMAnd+, you mayOSMAnd also has a *paid* subscription to support their work, even when >>>> the app itself is free and can be downloaded for free as well.
OSMAnd~/OSMAnd+ has both a free and paid version, as you're well aware.
I've used OSMAnd~ but I find it inferior to other solutions, even as I do >>> very much love that it's an open source project, even for the map database. >>
try to check it out. The subscription can be cancelled any time and is
only around 5.99 EUR per year(!).
What.
Ok, what does OSMAnd+ offer that'd improve the experience compared to OSMAnd~?
So you don't use anything at all which can not be paid with cash? You
can get Google Play cards in shops - for cash - and use them to pay for
apps.
And can you do that without a Google Account?
Maria Sophia wrote:
Google appears to be following Apple's brilliant marketing which is to make >> it miserable to impossible to load apps normally, & tell you it's for your >> own good.
But it doesn't seem to be the full "the sky is falling" that some were claiming/expecting several months ago ...
Nuno Silva wrote:
On 2026-08-31, Andy Burns wrote:
it doesn't seem to be the full "the sky is falling" that some wereclaiming/expecting several months ago ...
It's well into the dark side and could easily be abused to make it even
more cumbersome or impossible.
I'd not be surprised if the result was a part of the userbase just not
installing Android updates, if that's even contained in a specific
android OS version...
What miniscule proportion of Android users do you think ever attempt to install apps from other than the google or manufacturer's app store?
Carlos E.R. wrote:
Andy Burns wrote:Well yes, so do I, but people here aren't exactly typical android users.
What miniscule proportion of Android users do you think ever attempt
to install apps from other than the google or manufacturer's app store?
I do, some times. I have things from F-droid.
"Carlos E.R." wrote:
Andy Burns wrote:
Carlos E.R. wrote:
I do, some times. I have things from F-droid.Well yes, so do I, but people here aren't exactly typical android users.
There are enough users that Google tries to stop them.
They claim it's to prevent people being conned into installing <hxxp://genuine-bank.com/not-a-scam-honest.apk>
That might be their spin, but if they'd wanted to, they could have made
it much harder to sideload, but they haven't, and the message on their webpage is "sideloading is here to stay" ...
Nuno Silva wrote:
On 2026-08-31, Andy Burns wrote:
it doesn't seem to be the full "the sky is falling" that some wereclaiming/expecting several months ago ...
It's well into the dark side and could easily be abused to make it even
more cumbersome or impossible.
I'd not be surprised if the result was a part of the userbase just not
installing Android updates, if that's even contained in a specific
android OS version...
What miniscule proportion of Android users do you think ever attempt to install apps from other than the google or manufacturer's app store?
"Carlos E.R." wrote:
Andy Burns wrote:
Carlos E.R. wrote:
I do, some times. I have things from F-droid.Well yes, so do I, but people here aren't exactly typical android users.
There are enough users that Google tries to stop them.
They claim it's to prevent people being conned into installing <hxxp://genuine-bank.com/not-a-scam-honest.apk>
That might be their spin, but if they'd wanted to, they could have made
it much harder to sideload, but they haven't, and the message on their webpage is "sideloading is here to stay" ...
| Sysop: | Jacob Catayoc |
|---|---|
| Location: | Pasay City, Metro Manila, Philippines |
| Users: | 4 |
| Nodes: | 4 (0 / 4) |
| Uptime: | 497100:07:40 |
| Calls: | 182 |
| Files: | 744 |
| D/L today: |
16 files (5,383K bytes) |
| Messages: | 73,582 |
