Adobe's Low hanging .... ?

On Tue, 15 Jul 2014 11:14:34 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

I was pointing out that there are unique risks associated with phones
and that they are less secure storage for data than laptops.

the only risk is for theft.

otherwise, they're *more* secure since there are no moving parts to
fail.

Which model of any smart phone has no moving parts?

all of them.

buttons and switches do not count since those do not store data and
even if one fails, the data is intact.

you really have no clue, do you?

You really have difficulty in expressing what you mean. You previously
wrote "a cloud outage might be annoying, but the data won't be lost"
when you really meant a cloud outage might be annoying, but the data
won't be lost as it should be stored in a copy else where.

there is no need to say that since the default is for a copy of the
data in the cloud.

Then you should have said it was for the default case. Otherwise it's
a generalisation which isn't always correct.

not only that, but one of the key advantages of the cloud multiple
devices having access, so it's probably in many places. dropbox is a
good example.

now ask yourself how many people have only one copy of their data on a
hard drive. the answer is a lot. *they* are the ones who are going to
lose data.

Ditto with people and laptops and phones.

Now you say smartphones are "*more* secure since there are no moving
parts to fail" when you really meant smartphones are *more* secure
since there are no moving parts to fail except buttons and switches
which do not store data.

data storage is either on a hard drive or flash memory, not buttons and
switches.

So?

when someone says no moving parts with regards to data storage, they
mean no spinning disk.

Oh, do they? Is that what you meant? Then why didn't you say so?

only an idiot would bring up switches. they do move but that makes no
difference to the data. even if every button and switch was broken, the
data is unaffected.

Are you really saying that it is not possible for the failure of a
button or switch to cause the loss of data? You will have to be very
brave to say that: just because you don't know or can't think of an
example doesn't mean it can't happen.

yes.

data is not stored in a button or switch.

Gee - that's simplistic thinking.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

In article , PeterN
wrote:

Funny. The problem with my old iPhone was a broken internal switch. The
phone would turn on and off, but nothing could be accessed. According t
the good folks at the Apple store the diagnostic code was a bad internal
switch, or something like that. It cold not be repaired. Perhaps I
should have sent nospam to argue with them.

the phone may not have been usable as a phone, but the *data* on it was
not lost. it's still there.

The data may have been there, but it could not be accessed. It would not
sync with any computer. It could not be read by any computer.
Not even at the Apple store.

your story keeps changing.

it won't sync with anything other than the computer to which it was
first synced. once again, you don't know what you're talking about.

however, the data was there.

not only that, but a 'broken internal switch' isn't going to cause a
sync failure.

the switches do *not* matter.

the apple store staff wanted to fix the phone so you could use it as a
phone. that's to be expected.

The folks in th Apple store disagree with you.

no. their job is to fix stuff, not recover them.

if you want data recovery, try http://www.drivesavers.com/.

Once more yu have no idea WTF you are talking about.

i know *far* more about ios devices that you ever will.

And you selectively take comments out of context. But it doesn't matter.
We all know what you are, and act accordingly.

nothing was removed.
you are wrong again.

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

You really have difficulty in expressing what you mean. You previously
wrote "a cloud outage might be annoying, but the data won't be lost"
when you really meant a cloud outage might be annoying, but the data
won't be lost as it should be stored in a copy else where.

there is no need to say that since the default is for a copy of the
data in the cloud.

Then you should have said it was for the default case. Otherwise it's
a generalisation which isn't always correct.

the default does not need to be spelled out. that's why it's called the
default.

not only that, but one of the key advantages of the cloud multiple
devices having access, so it's probably in many places. dropbox is a
good example.

now ask yourself how many people have only one copy of their data on a
hard drive. the answer is a lot. *they* are the ones who are going to
lose data.

Ditto with people and laptops and phones.

no, because a phone is often backed up to the cloud without the user
needing to do much of anything.

Now you say smartphones are "*more* secure since there are no moving
parts to fail" when you really meant smartphones are *more* secure
since there are no moving parts to fail except buttons and switches
which do not store data.

data storage is either on a hard drive or flash memory, not buttons and
switches.

So?

it means that the device can have all buttons and switches removed and
the data will be there and readable.

when someone says no moving parts with regards to data storage, they
mean no spinning disk.

Oh, do they? Is that what you meant? Then why didn't you say so?

because it's obvious.

data is stored on a hard drive or ssd. not buttons.

only an idiot would bring up buttons, and sure enough, one did.

only an idiot would bring up switches. they do move but that makes no
difference to the data. even if every button and switch was broken, the
data is unaffected.

Are you really saying that it is not possible for the failure of a
button or switch to cause the loss of data? You will have to be very
brave to say that: just because you don't know or can't think of an
example doesn't mean it can't happen.

yes.

data is not stored in a button or switch.

Gee - that's simplistic thinking.

and correct.

On Tue, 15 Jul 2014 21:51:52 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

You really have difficulty in expressing what you mean. You previously
wrote "a cloud outage might be annoying, but the data won't be lost"
when you really meant a cloud outage might be annoying, but the data
won't be lost as it should be stored in a copy else where.

there is no need to say that since the default is for a copy of the
data in the cloud.

Then you should have said it was for the default case. Otherwise it's
a generalisation which isn't always correct.

the default does not need to be spelled out. that's why it's called the
default.

The trouble was that it was not said to be the default case (rather
than the general case) until well into the argument. Nor was the exact
nature of the default defined as such until well into the argument.
The problem with your failure to exactly define your terms until after
the argument is underway is that you use it to duck and weave and
genereally confuse the argument.

not only that, but one of the key advantages of the cloud multiple
devices having access, so it's probably in many places. dropbox is a
good example.

now ask yourself how many people have only one copy of their data on a
hard drive. the answer is a lot. *they* are the ones who are going to
lose data.

Ditto with people and laptops and phones.

no, because a phone is often backed up to the cloud without the user
needing to do much of anything.

You have ignored my mention of phones for which the overflow is
*stored* - not backed up but *stored* in the cloud. The people who do
that are certain their data is secure.

Now you say smartphones are "*more* secure since there are no moving
parts to fail" when you really meant smartphones are *more* secure
since there are no moving parts to fail except buttons and switches
which do not store data.

data storage is either on a hard drive or flash memory, not buttons and
switches.

So?

it means that the device can have all buttons and switches removed and
the data will be there and readable.

Who said anything about their removal? You shouldn't think only in
terms of software failures. I know of many cases where failure of
devices such as switches, contacts, sensors, gates etc have had quite
unintended consequences. I certainly would not rule out the
possibility of the loss of data in the event of a failure of buttons
and switches.

when someone says no moving parts with regards to data storage, they
mean no spinning disk.

Oh, do they? Is that what you meant? Then why didn't you say so?

because it's obvious.

data is stored on a hard drive or ssd. not buttons.

only an idiot would bring up buttons, and sure enough, one did.

And another idiot couln't see the obvious.

only an idiot would bring up switches. they do move but that makes no
difference to the data. even if every button and switch was broken, the
data is unaffected.

Are you really saying that it is not possible for the failure of a
button or switch to cause the loss of data? You will have to be very
brave to say that: just because you don't know or can't think of an
example doesn't mean it can't happen.

yes.

data is not stored in a button or switch.

Gee - that's simplistic thinking.

and correct.

It's not stored by switches but it's controlled by switches. See
above.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

You really have difficulty in expressing what you mean. You previously
wrote "a cloud outage might be annoying, but the data won't be lost"
when you really meant a cloud outage might be annoying, but the data
won't be lost as it should be stored in a copy else where.

there is no need to say that since the default is for a copy of the
data in the cloud.

Then you should have said it was for the default case. Otherwise it's
a generalisation which isn't always correct.

the default does not need to be spelled out. that's why it's called the
default.

The trouble was that it was not said to be the default case (rather
than the general case) until well into the argument. Nor was the exact
nature of the default defined as such until well into the argument.
The problem with your failure to exactly define your terms until after
the argument is underway is that you use it to duck and weave and
genereally confuse the argument.

no, you're blaming your misunderstanding on me when it's you.

there is no need to specify the default case since it's the default
case.

not only that, but one of the key advantages of the cloud multiple
devices having access, so it's probably in many places. dropbox is a
good example.

now ask yourself how many people have only one copy of their data on a
hard drive. the answer is a lot. *they* are the ones who are going to
lose data.

Ditto with people and laptops and phones.

no, because a phone is often backed up to the cloud without the user
needing to do much of anything.

You have ignored my mention of phones for which the overflow is
*stored* - not backed up but *stored* in the cloud. The people who do
that are certain their data is secure.

anyone that believes one copy of data is secure is in for a surprise.

and again, that's not the default case.

Now you say smartphones are "*more* secure since there are no moving
parts to fail" when you really meant smartphones are *more* secure
since there are no moving parts to fail except buttons and switches
which do not store data.

data storage is either on a hard drive or flash memory, not buttons and
switches.

So?

it means that the device can have all buttons and switches removed and
the data will be there and readable.

Who said anything about their removal?

it was to make a point that the buttons and switches are *irrelevant*
to data retention or loss.

You shouldn't think only in
terms of software failures. I know of many cases where failure of
devices such as switches, contacts, sensors, gates etc have had quite
unintended consequences. I certainly would not rule out the
possibility of the loss of data in the event of a failure of buttons
and switches.

they won't make one bit of difference.

for example, take a laptop and snap off every key on the keyboard, snap
the hinge and pry out the trackpad button.

the data is still on the hard drive, intact.

if the laptop won't boot into target disk mode, simply remove the hard
drive and put it in an enclosure.

nothing is lost.

for a phone, it's in the flash memory. the buttons are home, volume,
ring/silent and sleep/wake, none of which matter. the phone will
automatically boot when plugged in if it's off so the sleep/wake makes
no difference.

On Tue, 15 Jul 2014 23:59:05 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

You really have difficulty in expressing what you mean. You previously
wrote "a cloud outage might be annoying, but the data won't be lost"
when you really meant a cloud outage might be annoying, but the data
won't be lost as it should be stored in a copy else where.

there is no need to say that since the default is for a copy of the
data in the cloud.

Then you should have said it was for the default case. Otherwise it's
a generalisation which isn't always correct.

the default does not need to be spelled out. that's why it's called the
default.

The trouble was that it was not said to be the default case (rather
than the general case) until well into the argument. Nor was the exact
nature of the default defined as such until well into the argument.
The problem with your failure to exactly define your terms until after
the argument is underway is that you use it to duck and weave and
genereally confuse the argument.

no, you're blaming your misunderstanding on me when it's you.

there is no need to specify the default case since it's the default
case.

Who says? Where did they say it.

not only that, but one of the key advantages of the cloud multiple
devices having access, so it's probably in many places. dropbox is a
good example.

now ask yourself how many people have only one copy of their data on a
hard drive. the answer is a lot. *they* are the ones who are going to
lose data.

Ditto with people and laptops and phones.

no, because a phone is often backed up to the cloud without the user
needing to do much of anything.

You have ignored my mention of phones for which the overflow is
*stored* - not backed up but *stored* in the cloud. The people who do
that are certain their data is secure.

anyone that believes one copy of data is secure is in for a surprise.

Eventually, yes.

and again, that's not the default case.

Who says? Where did they say it?

Now you say smartphones are "*more* secure since there are no moving
parts to fail" when you really meant smartphones are *more* secure
since there are no moving parts to fail except buttons and switches
which do not store data.

data storage is either on a hard drive or flash memory, not buttons and
switches.

So?

it means that the device can have all buttons and switches removed and
the data will be there and readable.

Who said anything about their removal?

it was to make a point that the buttons and switches are *irrelevant*
to data retention or loss.

You shouldn't think only in
terms of software failures. I know of many cases where failure of
devices such as switches, contacts, sensors, gates etc have had quite
unintended consequences. I certainly would not rule out the
possibility of the loss of data in the event of a failure of buttons
and switches.

they won't make one bit of difference.

Hoo-boy. One day you will get a surprise.

for example, take a laptop and snap off every key on the keyboard, snap
the hinge and pry out the trackpad button.

the data is still on the hard drive, intact.

That's the default failure is it? Can't you think of any others?

No, I suppose not.

if the laptop won't boot into target disk mode, simply remove the hard
drive and put it in an enclosure.

nothing is lost.

for a phone, it's in the flash memory. the buttons are home, volume,
ring/silent and sleep/wake, none of which matter. the phone will
automatically boot when plugged in if it's off so the sleep/wake makes
no difference.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

In article , PeterN wrote:

PeterN:
Which model of any smart phone has no moving parts?

nospam:
all of them.

buttons and switches do not count since those do not store data
and even if one fails, the data is intact.

you really have no clue, do you?

Eric Stevens:
You really have difficulty in expressing what you mean. You
previously wrote "a cloud outage might be annoying, but the data
won't be lost" when you really meant a cloud outage might be
annoying, but the data won't be lost as it should be stored in a
copy else where.

Now you say smartphones are "*more* secure since there are no
moving parts to fail" when you really meant smartphones are *more*
secure since there are no moving parts to fail except buttons and
switches which do not store data.

Are you really saying that it is not possible for the failure of a
button or switch to cause the loss of data? You will have to be
very brave to say that: just because you don't know or can't think
of an example doesn't mean it can't happen.

Funny. The problem with my old iPhone was a broken internal switch.

What "switch" was this? You say it's an internal component, and the topic
was "moving parts" so you seem to imply that inside your iPhone there was a
mechanical physically moving "switch" that was broken. Having seen the
insides of many iPhones (I have a friend that repair them), I can assure
you that no such switch exists.

The phone would turn on and off, but nothing could be accessed.
According t the good folks at the Apple store the diagnostic code
was a bad internal switch, or something like that. It cold not be
repaired. Perhaps I should have sent nospam to argue with them.

Since the topic was data loss, are you here claiming that this internal
"switch" failing also made your phone backup fail? Or are you saying that
in spite of your iPhone explictly asking you to, and Apple providing it for
free, you declined automatic backup of your phone?

Because if you didn't decline, and you had backup, then your replacement
iPhone would just ask for your iCloud credentials and then just restore
your new phone with all the data from your old phone.

So regardless of this "internal switch" whatever that is supposed to mean,
your phone data - while unrecoverable inside your old phone - was not
actually lost since you're smart enough to utilize the automatic and free
of charge backup mechanism in iCloud (or the automatic free of charge
backup mechanism in iTunes if you distrust the cloud).


--
Sandman[.net]

In article , Sandman
wrote:

Funny. The problem with my old iPhone was a broken internal switch.

What "switch" was this? You say it's an internal component, and the topic
was "moving parts" so you seem to imply that inside your iPhone there was a
mechanical physically moving "switch" that was broken. Having seen the
insides of many iPhones (I have a friend that repair them), I can assure
you that no such switch exists.

he's talking out is ass. there is no 'internal switch'.

the *only* buttons and switches are on the outside (not inside), where
a user can access them. an internal switch makes no sense whatsoever.

the status of any of those buttons/switches or whether any of them are
even functional do not affect data retention or being able to access
the data at all.

there are even ways to continue to use an iphone/ipad with broken
buttons/switches although obviously less convenient than getting it
repaired, which for an out of warranty device may not be worth it.

and for those who don't want to disassemble their iphone to check
what's really in there, just check out any of the teardowns online.

The phone would turn on and off, but nothing could be accessed.
According t the good folks at the Apple store the diagnostic code
was a bad internal switch, or something like that. It cold not be
repaired. Perhaps I should have sent nospam to argue with them.

Since the topic was data loss, are you here claiming that this internal
"switch" failing also made your phone backup fail? Or are you saying that
in spite of your iPhone explictly asking you to, and Apple providing it for
free, you declined automatic backup of your phone?

Because if you didn't decline, and you had backup, then your replacement
iPhone would just ask for your iCloud credentials and then just restore
your new phone with all the data from your old phone.

So regardless of this "internal switch" whatever that is supposed to mean,
your phone data - while unrecoverable inside your old phone - was not
actually lost since you're smart enough to utilize the automatic and free
of charge backup mechanism in iCloud (or the automatic free of charge
backup mechanism in iTunes if you distrust the cloud).

a backup certainly makes things easier, but the data in his old phone
was still there.

he's wrong.

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

there is no need to specify the default case since it's the default
case.

Who says? Where did they say it.

what do you think default *means*?

On 7/15/2014 9:51 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN
wrote:

Funny. The problem with my old iPhone was a broken internal switch. The
phone would turn on and off, but nothing could be accessed. According t
the good folks at the Apple store the diagnostic code was a bad internal
switch, or something like that. It cold not be repaired. Perhaps I
should have sent nospam to argue with them.

the phone may not have been usable as a phone, but the *data* on it was
not lost. it's still there.

The data may have been there, but it could not be accessed. It would not
sync with any computer. It could not be read by any computer.
Not even at the Apple store.

your story keeps changing.

it won't sync with anything other than the computer to which it was
first synced. once again, you don't know what you're talking about.

however, the data was there.

not only that, but a 'broken internal switch' isn't going to cause a
sync failure.

the switches do *not* matter.

the apple store staff wanted to fix the phone so you could use it as a
phone. that's to be expected.

The folks in th Apple store disagree with you.

no. their job is to fix stuff, not recover them.

if you want data recovery, try http://www.drivesavers.com/.

Once more yu have no idea WTF you are talking about.

i know *far* more about ios devices that you ever will.

And you selectively take comments out of context. But it doesn't matter.
We all know what you are, and act accordingly.

nothing was removed.
you are wrong again.


And just where did I used the word "removed." Do learn to read.

--
PeterN