Has anyone got this Bolt-On from O2?
I'm interested in having constant access to the Net (or rather downloading stuff like Weather updates and uploading/downloading GPS positions on a live tracking system as well as MSN Messnger, email, etc.)
Does anyone have any statistics on what you can roughly do before they start to charge?
Is there a way to say, NOT use the net if you've reached a certain limit or up/download etc or some way of monitoring your monthly usage?
I'm with T-Mobile atm so no knowledge of this, but to monitor web usage I'd use Battery Status (can't find a link right now, but a quick google should find it). I think you can set a monthly limit in it, but not sure exactly.
Cheers mate, will look at BatteryStatus.
They dont have a limit on there internet usage anymore with there package, at over £35 a month you can have unlimted internet (what i have) and below £35 a month the bolt on is 7.50 a month extra.
last month i downloaded almost 300meg on my phone no problem.
I was told by O2 they no longer have a fair usage policy either, only an excessive use which means that they will warn you if your using it to much first, and the guy from o2 said that excessive use means that you will be affecting other users. So basically you cant go wrong.
I use mine to for weather, all my email including attachments, downloading mp3s & movies, watching youtube.
Never had a problem.
loomx, that's good to know. Thanks for that.
I'm on a £35pm contract, but only paying £25pm (o2's problems last year, I was gonna close the account but they convinced me to stay so got a good deal).
But I certainly won't be downloading/uploading a lot. Just live GPS tracking, weather updates, emails (nobody loves me that much so only a couple a day!! )
But that's good to know, thanks.
Yes, I have the bolt on. My phone checks emails every 15mins and I surf the internet sometimes. Never used more than 100MB a month.
I use the gpsd monitor software that came with your phone.
same here, using around 200 meg a month according to the free GPRS monitor software, and all fine. I've got POP3 checking every 15 mins, MSN Messenger on permanently, check a few sites every day, works great. (Had to switch off HSDPA though as my battery was suffering!)
There's no point in HSDPA on o2 personal non business contracts capped at 128kbps anyway
I have the bolt-on and I've no idea how much data I use, and don't care unless o2 send me an SMS
I took the free bolt-on with my upgrade and I made sure that I double checked the online terms and conditions and then again with their staff.
There is no download limit!
The restrictions are that you cannot use skype, IPSMS or other such features and you cannot connect another device to use your internet connection.
If you download 5Gb of video from the YouTube, thats fine
If you let your PC download 1Mb of videos from YouTube you are in breach
If you use skype thats a breach as well.
Biomehanika said:
I took the free bolt-on with my upgrade and I made sure that I double checked the online terms and conditions and then again with their staff.
There is no download limit!
The restrictions are that you cannot use skype, IPSMS or other such features and you cannot connect another device to use your internet connection.
If you download 5Gb of video from the YouTube, thats fine
If you let your PC download 1Mb of videos from YouTube you are in breach
If you use skype thats a breach as well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That’s good news BTW is that on a business or consumer tariff ?
Thats on the consumer tariff!
I have the bolt-on. I have only just started using it so I cannot comment on throughput. I will on occasion be using the internet sharing to hook-up my laptop but only a couple of weekends a year.
If they catch me I guess I'll suffer a warning or something, shan't be putting a lot through it anyway.
I have occasionally used internet sharing on my T-Mobile Web and walk pass which is not supposed to be used for tethering etc. Even after I download a few ROMs T-Mobile made no comment.
Okay so here's the deal. I'm a BlackBerry to Android convert and I miss my BBM. So my new project is a BBM for the Android. I won't promise that I'll actually get it to work but I have every intention of it. So here's what I want to know: What do you all want in it?
What do you think would be a good name? The more professional the better obviously. I want the messenger to be taken seriously. (I'm pretty much clueless here, I suck with names. Read my screen name, you'll understand.)
What functions do you want to have? (EX. Location parameter where the messenger tells you when you're close to a friend.)
Let me know what you want out of it. For the moment I'm creating an outline of the functions that I plan for it to have which are as follows:
Messaging
- Sent over Internet connection not via text message
- Threading (Bubbles, divisions)
- See sent/delivered/read status
- Group Chat (Without Invite)
- Group Chat (With Invite)
Contacts
- Ability to add standard contacts
- Unique Pin to each divice
- - Barcode Scanner to add contacts
Status Updates
- Ability (Choice) to sync with twitter/facebook
- Show current music selection
- Show Busy/Available Orb
- Sync Busy/Available Status with Google calendar
Location Settings
- Update/Share Location with other contacts
- Ping/Alert of Contacts near you
- Show all contacts on map
Maybe Added
- Video Chat
(I don't really have a way to test this since I only have a Droid Eris but I'll see what I can do after I get a nice stable app.)
What other suggestions do you have?
And yes I'm aware of the messengers like pingchat and Hello so stop telling me to use those please.
Current Suggested Names:
A2M - Android - Android Messenger (A^2 M. When it was explained to me it was like A squared (A^2 = AA))
ADM - Android Messenger
ARC - Android Relay Chat
DMA - Droid Messenger App
DAM - Droid Alert Messenger (probably won't be used because of abbreviation)
DRC - Droid Relay Chat
ADM is the obvious choice but I was hoping for something more unique/catchy...whatever. Please keep suggesting names. I'm working on the app every free moment I have.
In most likely hood the first beta will be on my Droid and those of my friends so I can see it first hand (how it behaves, speed, battery drain etc.) and not release a defective pile of code. Pretty much everybody will see this on the market rather than me posting it here but I may do both. I don't know. We'll see when that time comes. For the mean time I'll make a beta list anyway.
Beta Test List:
Pretty much anyone that asks
As for those who have said that they hope I go through with this: I will. It's going to take a while. I work full time and I'm a full time college student. This may not happen soon but it will happen.
Oh this would be awesome! I would use it.
Not trying to be a downer, but don't we already have this... gtalk?
phantomzer0 said:
Not trying to be a downer, but don't we already have this... gtalk?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah I suppose, but personally, I'm just not a fan of Gtalk.
I may sound conceited saying this but, I liked then fact that BBM was pretty much exclusive to the BlackBerry. I miss that exclusivity. Everyone can use Gtalk.
Plus Gtalk doesn't have all of the features that I intend to add.
But you're not the first person to say that I and do see the point
I'd definitely give it a try too. I was a die-hard blackberry addict as well and BBM was a great tool to have. One major benefit was how fast it was (unless BB servers were down) In your app I'd hope to see high speed from phone to phone. Good luck!
i dig it.
im all for it.
maxxve said:
I'd definitely give it a try too. I was a die-hard blackberry addict as well and BBM was a great tool to have. One major benefit was how fast it was (unless BB servers were down) In your app I'd hope to see high speed from phone to phone. Good luck!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The reason BBM was so fast was that it totally bypasses the public Internet and goes straight through RIM's servers.
Honestly, Talk/Latitude. Without a private network such as BIS, there is zero practical advantage to such a system. Building an exclusive club just to feel special is childish and a waste of talent.
ConstantineXVI said:
The reason BBM was so fast was that it totally bypasses the public Internet and goes straight through RIM's servers.
Honestly, Talk/Latitude. Without a private network such as BIS, there is zero practical advantage to such a system. Building an exclusive club just to feel special is childish and a waste of talent.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Everything is a matter of perception I suppose. You see it as a waste of talent, I see it as putting a talent to use. If you read the comments, there are several in favor of the idea. Maybe they along with myself simply just don't know better, but it doesn't hurt to try does it?
If I can use what I have to make a useful tool then I will. I'm not promising anything from this. It may work and it may not. I simply want a messenger that has as much functionality as the BBM. It's not totally about exclusivity. I freely admit that if it were solely for that reason, it would be a childish motive, but it's about having something that can increase productivity as well.
uhhh you might want to check out hellomessenger. It's already available for blackberry and iPhone (even supports BIS on the blackberry), and a public beta for Android should be out soon...
anyways just my two cents. I wanted to write the same thing till I found out about hellomessenger. No point reinventing the wheel
*EDIT* errr my bad.. you already know about hellomessenger.
I would use this!!!! I love this idea!
Write an app that supports Yahoo, AIM, MSN, and Jabber (GTalk, Facebook, etc) and STAYS CONNECTED and doesn't use a boatload of data/battery. I don't care about much else as long as the client itself is designed decently.
I'd just use a Jabber client with connectors but Jabber still isn't very mobile friendly in terms of data usage, therefore battery usage.
And to stay connected and not use a lot of data almost requires a central server which proxies the connections.. Even if you lose connectivity on the phone for a moment (or minutes) your stay online and get connections.. And the central server handles all of the ping/pong, presence, all that nonsense that moves significant data.
I still miss Verichat on PalmOS. It was almost perfect.
kwazi said:
uhhh you might want to check out hellomessenger. It's already available for blackberry and iPhone (even supports BIS on the blackberry), and a public beta for Android should be out soon...
anyways just my two cents. I wanted to write the same thing till I found out about hellomessenger. No point reinventing the wheel
*EDIT* errr my bad.. you already know about hellomessenger.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haha Yup
I already know but it's still a valid point
khaytsus said:
Write an app that supports Yahoo, AIM, MSN, and Jabber (GTalk, Facebook, etc) and STAYS CONNECTED and doesn't use a boatload of data/battery. I don't care about much else as long as the client itself is designed decently.
I'd just use a Jabber client with connectors but Jabber still isn't very mobile friendly in terms of data usage, therefore battery usage.
And to stay connected and not use a lot of data almost requires a central server which proxies the connections.. Even if you lose connectivity on the phone for a moment (or minutes) your stay online and get connections.. And the central server handles all of the ping/pong, presence, all that nonsense that moves significant data.
I still miss Verichat on PalmOS. It was almost perfect.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you trying to say you want a multi-chat client which stays connected all the time but doesn't use a lot of data/battery?
Having the data network connection or wifi connection will drain battery... So having it connected all the time will drain "boatload" of battery...
Thats why apps have a sync option... where they sync every x minutes or hours... the more time between syncs the less data and battery life used.
Simple.
The latest beta of the WhatsApp uses Android Push (C2DM) ... It does not poll
So yes, it does not drain battery "unless" a message is pushed
sintaku said:
Are you trying to say you want a multi-chat client which stays connected all the time but doesn't use a lot of data/battery?
Having the data network connection or wifi connection will drain battery... So having it connected all the time will drain "boatload" of battery...
Thats why apps have a sync option... where they sync every x minutes or hours... the more time between syncs the less data and battery life used.
Simple.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok not to be the one who really is a downer here but if you are a talented app dev I would spend your time elsewhere, for all those on this thread, I read about an app that does this the other day. Delivery/Read icons, group chats, send files, images etc. Called PingChat. Reviewer says main issue is getting people on it. This is cross platform as well. I can't post a link yet so look up pingchat
sintaku said:
Are you trying to say you want a multi-chat client which stays connected all the time but doesn't use a lot of data/battery?
Having the data network connection or wifi connection will drain battery... So having it connected all the time will drain "boatload" of battery...
Thats why apps have a sync option... where they sync every x minutes or hours... the more time between syncs the less data and battery life used.
Simple.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nonsense. An idle data network connection = No drain. Wifi I don't use. I already have K9 Mail, Weather, etc syncing...
What I was asking for, which I thought was abundantly clear, was one which filters most traffic and only talks to the client or the client talks to the server as necessary and the server side otherwise handles the bulk of the normal traffic.
And there are IM apps with a "sync" option? Really? Name one.
as long as is compatible with bbm pin #
raul1905 said:
as long as is compatible with bbm pin #
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
RIM won't like that
They wan't BBM to stay exclusive on BB's ofcourse. I know it's bull****, but that's the way they sell so they won't ever give up the rights to BBM. If you wan't to connect with BB users, you have to make this app cross-platform like pingchat or whatsapp.
so if there is already pingchat and whatsapp.. then why make another one?
raul1905 said:
as long as is compatible with bbm pin #
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Won't happen. BBM is closed protocol and goes over RIM's servers....nothing else can connect to it. Otherwise someone would have made an app with this functionality already.
Well Folks,
So I've been using this OS now for 2 full months and by full I mean I have spent most of my free time learning about it and as much as I find this OS exciting and I believe this is where computing is really at now, I thought I'd share some thoughts on its irritants and get your feedback and opinions about it, so that it could be improved upon in future iterations.
I would like to mention that I have been using computers since the days of punched cards back in the 70s and that I'm no stranger to writing programs, although I am not a computing or IT professional and have only dabbled working on a few programs and scripts only to the extent of doing what was necessary for my work.
That being said, here's some of what I think of this OS, its strengths and weaknesses, its bugs (some, most probably from Google, would insist they are features - more on this later) and its successes. I hope that by posting this others will add their comments, rants and raves as well.
To moderators, if this has already been discussed or of this should be moved to another forum or in any way wish to criticize it, feel free to do so.
***
As much as I was a Microsoft fan during the 90s, this OS sold me as the only one where freedom to innovate and a large community of enthusiasts seem to thrive, whereas Microsoft has become sclerotic and is now under control of corporate culture and thinking, in other words, it's lost its soul and is just running on inertia. I'll stop here so as not to insult the grays who have taken control of it and think it's the best thing since sliced bread.
The open source / free software (lets not get into semantics, please!) sure has fostered a lot of friendly development and sharing and this is definitely the way of the future, notwithstanding what corporate America believes. History has proven that small entities have always been the most productive in society, and it shows in real life and especially here: Although Google, who is the de-facto giant in control of the platform, officially frowns on user control and participation into the OS, it actually benefits from it and doesn't interfere too much with its evolution and as far as I can see, has actually embraced quite a few innovations that we've seen coming to life here and on other forums.
In other words, they don't like it when developers modify it, but are happy to benefit from it in the end, except perhaps those innovations that give more control to users that they wish users should have, but at least and contrarily to Apple and Microsoft, they are not persecuting those who innovate. God knows we already have way too much of that military-style control in our society where major corporations and their lawyers dictate pretty much what citizens can and cannot do.
As much as this OS is promising with its fundamental openness (at least at its roots) and is the least oppressive of them all, there is still a lot to do, or should I say, a lot of restrictions to lift and doors to open to make it a truly open and free platform for software development, and this goes straight back to Google and its overbearing influence on the development of this OS. But I guess we have had to sacrifice some freedom in order to get some support from this corporate giant; so here are some things that, over the past two months experience with the platform, I find severely lacking and in dire need of rethinking:
- Google's overbearing attitude and control over users, especially personified in the Play Store, where one cannot comment freely anymore and the use of which has been aggravating to no end and THE cause of crashes and dysfunction of the device: It only works some times and is so ingrained in the OS that when it misbehaves, you often have to no choice but to reinitialize the OS (aka the 'cold boot'), which, of course, causes havoc with your data and personal settings, which brings me to my next issue:
- The File System: Where is my stuff stored and why is it so difficult to find it and save it? You'd think it's a crime to save your own data! What gives? Why is it so difficult for apps or user settings to be saved in a location chosen by the user? Just try this: of all you apps, how many of them can you access the data from outside of the application and keep safe for the next time when your phone needs to be reinitialized?
- Connection to external devices: We all agree that connection is king and the key to efficient use of portable devices. Can someone explain to me then why does Android make is so difficult to access and transfer files between LOCAL DEVICES such as USB drives and computers and why it must hide some parts of itself and makes every effort to hide user data and keep it out of reach from its owner?
- The Cloud Fad: why is it that Google insists so much on taking over my Data? Why is it not telling me where it is stored and why is it hiding it from me? Knowing how Google manipulates and basically snoops in on everything you do (it's been proven), why would anyone in their right mind trust to have their stuff stored out of their reach when external hard drive so cheap it's almost free? Can someone explain what the advantage is to me, especially when wireless connections are precarious at best and data transport costs more and more? You find that 'convenient'?
- Background Data: Can someone tell me why my device needs to transport SO MUCH stuff in the background and why it needs to do so when it can operate quite happily otherwise when it notices that there isn't a data connection available? Doesn't Google realize that Wireless Data is horrendously expensive? Why can I not, as a user, control what data is sent back in the background in a granular way instead of having to shut it down at system level? Is Google afraid what users might find out about what information is sent to their servers without their explicit knowledge? Which brings me finally to
- Permissions: Why is it so difficult for users to control application permissions? Just like licenses, we only have the choice to 'take it or leave it', without any true knowledge what we sold the devil. Permissions are pernicious and should be under total control of the user. Those developers who need those permissions should explain them all and make it possible for users to deactivate them all so that users could see if the reduced functionality is worth it or not. LET USERS DECIDES WHAT GOES ON THEIR DEVICE!
***
So that's it for my Saturday afternoon rant. Like I said, these things have irritated me for a long time. If you have objections, comments or accolades and additions, here's the place to do so, unless of course the moderators decide otherwise: if this has been discussed somewhere else and I've bothered you with this post, by all means let me know.
All of this that you mention can be done. Not necessarily from pure vanilla AOSP Android. But you can do all of this with the power of custom ROMs such as CyanogenMod.
User data is stored in the /data partition. Apps can be found in /data/app and app data is found in /data/data
You can disable background data using an app that needs root access. There are many available on the Play Store.
You can control an apps permissions, again with an app that needs root access. Found on the Play Store.
Sent from my Slim E4GT using xda premium
Mattix724 said:
All of this that you mention can be done. Not necessarily from pure vanilla AOSP Android. But you can do all of this with the power of custom ROMs such as CyanogenMod.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And that is the beauty of Android
Mattix724 said:
User data is stored in the /data partition. Apps can be found in /data/app and app data is found in /data/data
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Great to know! But you must admit that having to ask, or more precisely not being told where it is, is disturbing! Because what is more important than your data? WHY does it have to be so difficult to get to it? Why the secrecy? Don't users deserve to know where their files are and be able to select where to store them? Why am I not AUTOMATICALLY given the CHOICE as to its name and its location on my device?
Mattix724 said:
You can disable background data using an app that needs root access. There are many available on the Play Store.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True, but why is such an essential function NOT part of the OS and what more, why does it require the user to VIOLATE his warranty (by rooting) to do so? Don't you see what's WRONG with this?
Mattix724 said:
You can control an apps permissions, again with an app that needs root access. Found on the Play Store.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Again, I understand; but doing so often breaks the apps. WHY do we need these permissions IMPOSED upon us in the first place? Doesn't it strike you as WRONG that so many apps need to access your most private information?
And coming back to the Google Play Store: I've used my device for two months and had to wipe it clean TWICE already and EVERY TIME because the Play Store refused to work anymore! Don't you think there's something wrong with this picture? Doesn't it hint at some homeland-security-esque infiltration deep into the OS from the part of Google?
***
In any case, I thank you for pointing out the practical solutions and workarounds and for getting the ball rolling, so to speak; but my point was more philosophical: WHY should we have to essentially "fight system" with these workarounds to do such straightforward things as as saving documents in a place of the user's choosing, being able to transfer files directly to his PC and being able to keep user privacy?
doesn't that bother anyone?
Shouldn't Android become more open and accessible as a platform that truly empowers its users and leave Apple and Microsoft to cater to those who couldn't be bothered?
Looking forward to your answers!
I sware people will complain nomatter what
Sent by Hellybelly 4.2.2
Disabling Background Data Completely?
Mattix724 said:
All of this that you mention can be done. Not necessarily from pure vanilla AOSP Android. But you can do all of this with the power of custom ROMs such as CyanogenMod.
You can disable background data using an app that needs root access. There are many available on the Play Store.
Sent from my Slim E4GT using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OK, so I have looked very extensively, spending hours searching for a way to disable background data and although they are many ways to do so when on cellular data, short of shutting off WiFi altogether, I have not found any discussion, much less a way to do so completely when on WiFi.
One of my concerns is to know WHY background data is even required, because shutting off all data connections certainly does not prevent my apps from working , even those that do require data such as weather, email and news. I just want to be able to fetch the data I need and have total control over what I broadcast, especially what goes on in the background without my explicit knowledge.
So the question remains: short of shutting off data altogether, how can I disable background data completely?
Wouldn't it be possible to either fake a connection so as to fool the system into thinking there is a connection for its hidden background processes, or to wake a connection up on demand when initiating querries and put it to sleep immediately after the answer has arrived?
Old faithful said:
OK, so I have looked very extensively, spending hours searching for a way to disable background data and although they are many ways to do so when on cellular data, short of shutting off WiFi altogether, I have not found any discussion, much less a way to do so completely when on WiFi.
One of my concerns is to know WHY background data is even required, because shutting off all data connections certainly does not prevent my apps from working , even those that do require data such as weather, email and news. I just want to be able to fetch the data I need and have total control over what I broadcast, especially what goes on in the background without my explicit knowledge.
So the question remains: short of shutting off data altogether, how can I disable background data completely?
Wouldn't it be possible to either fake a connection so as to fool the system into thinking there is a connection for its hidden background processes, or to wake a connection up on demand when initiating querries and put it to sleep immediately after the answer has arrived?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A simple data firewall program will take care of that. It will allow you to control what and when things get a data connection.
zelendel said:
A simple data firewall program will take care of that. It will allow you to control what and when things get a data connection.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmmm... I'm using Avast and its firewall doesn't have the option to turn off background data on Wi-Fi, it's either turn off Wi-Fi or not, no option to just turn off background data and leave access to foreground data. I've tried a few other apps that don't have this option either; it's all or nothing.
Do you know of any apps that have that granular choice? Could you suggest a few?
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 2
Old faithful said:
...
One of my concerns is to know WHY background data is even required, because shutting off all data connections certainly does not prevent my apps from working , even those that do require data such as weather, email and news. I just want to be able to fetch the data I need and have total control over what I broadcast, especially what goes on in the background without my explicit knowledge.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
what sort of background data do you want to disable? regarding weather, email, and news, turn off auto sync (disable it all, or by program).
edscholl said:
what sort of background data do you want to disable? regarding weather, email, and news, turn off auto sync (disable it all, or by program).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Precisely ... WHAT sort of background data needs to go on anyway?
Fetching the weather info takes up a few tens of KB. What then does it need to transfer megabytes in the background for then? My wife's weather widget in particular has used over 200 MB over the past month in background data whereas it has only needed a couple of megs to update itself! Doesn't that seem exaggerated?
My point is, what is background data needed for when these apps work perfectly well on demand with a tiny fraction of the bandwidth? Why is there no disclosure what exactly it is used for, if shutting data off when not in use has absolutely no detrimental effect on the function of the app, in other words, what's really going on?
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 2
Count your blessings!
I agree with you to some extent. Of course, you can do anything with root access, but why isn't this right here in front of me out of the box. With my Galaxy S III, managing the file system is a pain, and considering my USB Sync cable doesn't work long enough to make file transfers of 100MB+, this is a real problem. I don't want everything in the cloud, I want it here. I don't have internet (fast data speeds, at the least) everywhere. I would hope that Android advances with these features. I also wish there was a way, out of the box with skinned (by carrier or manufacturer) devices that you could disable all skins and themes and use the glorious Stock Android.
Seriously though, count your blessings, at least you're not using iOS!
Old faithful said:
Precisely ... WHAT sort of background data needs to go on anyway?
Fetching the weather info takes up a few tens of KB. What then does it need to transfer megabytes in the background for then? My wife's weather widget in particular has used over 200 MB over the past month in background data whereas it has only needed a couple of megs to update itself! Doesn't that seem exaggerated?
My point is, what is background data needed for when these apps work perfectly well on demand with a tiny fraction of the bandwidth? Why is there no disclosure what exactly it is used for, if shutting data off when not in use has absolutely no detrimental effect on the function of the app, in other words, what's really going on?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So shut sync off if you prefer. I like my apps up to date when I wake my phone, but nobody is going to force you to keep sync on. This is such a non-issue.
As for weather, I guess it depends what app she's using. Looks like my weather widget used less than 1mb of data in the last month...
Background Data Implications
edscholl said:
So shut sync off if you prefer. I like my apps up to date when I wake my phone, but nobody is going to force you to keep sync on. This is such a non-issue.
As for weather, I guess it depends what app she's using. Looks like my weather widget used less than 1mb of data in the last month...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
On my device, with sync off, background data off, I still get 119 KB foreground, 2.33 MB in the background for the past week, on WiFi, whcih I already turn off most of the time, because it's the only way I have found so far to stop the data leak.
I understand this may be a non issue for folks who have gigabytes of bandwidth a month and don't pay $50 per megabyte off contract like we do or $10 for 100MB, but my concern is deeper than that: what's happening in the background? Why do YOU implicitly trust what's happening in the background without full disclosure?
Also, regarding the voracity of Android for data, when I was on windows mobile with push email on a four hour basis, I used to use no more than a few MB per month, and that was with cellular data on at all times and I'd hardly use more than 50MB per month browsing on wap sites which did a great job of cutting out the non-content garbage that is so prevalent on regular 'full' sites these days.
I understand this may seem like a non-issue to those for whom data is plentiful and cheap, and that most of you implicitly trust what apps do with your data in the background, but to find this being dismissed is deeply worrisome to me: why SHOULD we trust Google and others corporations with our personal information, without even as much as a look at what's being transferred and for what reason? Doesn't that disturb anyone at all???
In any case, thank you for answering and keeping the debate open, so to speak.
To turn off background data go to settings, select Data Usage, press menu button and the check the restrict background data check box.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using xda premium
You can go even further and customize each apps background data usage from the same screen.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using xda premium
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using xda premium
Sorry, just saw where you were talking about background data via WiFi....:banghead:
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using xda premium
Old faithful said:
On my device, with sync off, background data off, I still get 119 KB foreground, 2.33 MB in the background for the past week, on WiFi, whcih I already turn off most of the time, because it's the only way I have found so far to stop the data leak.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So what apps are using data? Why don't you turn off background data if you care? Heck, turn off WiFi and mobile networks when thou don't want to sync if you're worried about leakage.
Old faithful said:
I understand this may be a non issue for folks who have gigabytes of bandwidth a month and don't pay $50 per megabyte off contract like we do or $10 for 100MB, but my concern is deeper than that: what's happening in the background? Why do YOU implicitly trust what's happening in the background without full disclosure?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You implicitly trust apps with some data access when you install it, with the specific access given to you. If you think otherwise, your fooling yourself. I'm not sure why foreground vs background data makes much difference to you once you've trusted the app with data access anyway- it's not like it tells you how much data it's going to use per network transaction if you manually tell it to update...
Old faithful said:
Also, regarding the voracity of Android for data, when I was on windows mobile with push email on a four hour basis, I used to use no more than a few MB per month, and that was with cellular data on at all times and I'd hardly use more than 50MB per month browsing on wap sites which did a great job of cutting out the non-content garbage that is so prevalent on regular 'full' sites these days.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
50mb a month... I'm not sure I'd bother with a smartphone if I used data so little.
Old faithful said:
I understand this may seem like a non-issue to those for whom data is plentiful and cheap, and that most of you implicitly trust what apps do with your data in the background, but to find this being dismissed is deeply worrisome to me: why SHOULD we trust Google and others corporations with our personal information, without even as much as a look at what's being transferred and for what reason? Doesn't that disturb anyone at all???
In any case, thank you for answering and keeping the debate open, so to speak.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We trust them because it makes our lives simpler, and quite frankly, most of us really aren't doing anything all that interesting with our data and Google and others really aren't interested in your personal info (not to be mistaken for an assertion that they're not interested in serving up ads relevant to you). But there's certainly a tradeoff. If you're not comfortable with it, turn it all off, or don't use a smartphone - nobody will hold it against thou.
Konvey said:
I agree with you to some extent. Of course, you can do anything with root access
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you can direct me to an app that allows me to COMPLETELY shut off background data for all apps including the OS, for any type of connection, incuding WiFi, I wouldn't be so concerned, but I have looked for the past two months now and found nothing so far that does that, even the acclaimed Droidwall can't turn background data off, even when everything is turned off, meaning, NO data access whatsoever: the bloody "OS Services" still happily does its thing in the backrground, and there is no way to find out what it does (I tried tPacketCapture - I only get 24 byte long files that I can't read anything out of)
Since it would seem that the problem is deep within the operating system, it would seem that the only way to completely shut off background data would be to give a local host redirect for every BACKGROUND process, such as what is possible in Windows using a 127.0.0.1 riderect. Since I'm a newbie when it comes to Android I don't know how to do it, but surely there must be a way, or a way to connect to WiFi only on demand?
Konvey said:
but why isn't this right here in front of me out of the box. With my Galaxy S III, managing the file system is a pain, and considering my USB Sync cable doesn't work long enough to make file transfers of 100MB+, this is a real problem. I don't want everything in the cloud, I want it here. I don't have internet (fast data speeds, at the least) everywhere. I would hope that Android advances with these features. I also wish there was a way, out of the box with skinned (by carrier or manufacturer) devices that you could disable all skins and themes and use the glorious Stock Android.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly. I am still looking for a file explorer with the functionality of my old Norton File Manager (remember that one?). I can't understand why the so-called 'expert' ones such as Root Explorer don't have accessible sorting features (why hide it in settings? Isn't that a basic, essential feature of any file management system to be able to sort based on these common criteria?).
Furthermore, I'd love nothing more than being able to swipe left from the home screen directly into the file system for direct access to shortcuts, packages and data, and to be able to specify where the OS shoudl store MY data (instead of keeping it hidden as is most often the case).
Konvey said:
Seriously though, count your blessings, at least you're not using iOS!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I couldn't agree more, I'll never have an Apple product in my house, no need to say more, we all know about Apple's control of its users and tyrannical ways. George Orwell had it mostly right, but where he failed is where Big Brother would come from: Not the government. Or perhaps we should say that Major Corporations, through the power of their lobbies, have indeed become the de-facto Government .
Thanks again for your answer, Ed.
edscholl said:
So what apps are using data? Why don't you turn off background data if you care? Heck, turn off WiFi and mobile networks when thou don't want to sync if you're worried about leakage.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Shutting WiFi off after use is what I've been doing of late, but it's an uphill battle. The minute I turn WiFi back on, the OS, like a ravenous dog, immediately gets into background data mode, trumping the foreground querries by volume. But it's a start
edscholl said:
You implicitly trust apps with some data access when you install it, with the specific access given to you. If you think otherwise, your fooling yourself. I'm not sure why foreground vs background data makes much difference to you once you've trusted the app with data access anyway- it's not like it tells you how much data it's going to use per network transaction if you manually tell it to update...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, but to see the data exchange so lopsided (most of it being background) is what makes me wonder what it really does. Perhaps it can be trusted but what bothers me is these apps don't tell you what they really do 'for you' in background mode and why they need so much bandwidth... I mean, how much data is required to transmit temperatures, weather conditions and the such? Heck any update would surely fit in a sub KB transmission even for 3 or 4 cities like I have in my setup...
edscholl said:
50mb a month... I'm not sure I'd bother with a smartphone if I used data so little.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To each his own, Ed. When data costs $10 for 100MB and the most you can get is 1GB for $60 (or as low as $30 on promo), you quickly come to your senses. That's, of course, another issue altogether.
Fact is, apart from media such as youtube and other streaming sites, text based information (or information update using apps that are supposed to have built in presentation such as snow fluries for "snow") should require very little data, typically 1KB per full size page. You have to admit that something is wrong with this picture that when I read a 500 word article it requires the same amount of bandwidth as the contents of a whole book!
edscholl said:
We trust them because it makes our lives simpler, and quite frankly, most of us really aren't doing anything all that interesting with our data and Google and others really aren't interested in your personal info (not to be mistaken for an assertion that they're not interested in serving up ads relevant to you). But there's certainly a tradeoff. If you're not comfortable with it, turn it all off, or don't use a smartphone - nobody will hold it against thou.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They do make our lives simpler and there is a trade-off, agreed. The point I make is where the line should be crossed. Are we willing to get shoved with 99% non content garbage in order to access the remaining 1% meaningful content? Because that is certainly the going rate for full websites such as cnet, tech republic and others, and when looking at background data on Android, at least from my perspective. I was online back in 1993 when the www started (before on Co$tly Compuserve) and with the limited technology we had at the time we could get access to more meaningful content faster than we can now, and with very, very limited bandwidth!
Ok, ok, enough of the oldtimer rant Maybe you are right and I'm just an old fool. But I'd rather be considered an old fool for asking stupid questions than to accept it all without any question
Old faithful said:
Yes, but to see the data exchange so lopsided (most of it being background) is what makes me wonder what it really does. Perhaps it can be trusted but what bothers me is these apps don't tell you what they really do 'for you' in background mode and why they need so much bandwidth... I mean, how much data is required to transmit temperatures, weather conditions and the such? Heck any update would surely fit in a sub KB transmission even for 3 or 4 cities like I have in my setup...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
and as I said, my weather widget uses (beautiful widgets) like 1mb a month. On my phone, the HTC sense widget uses like 5mb.
So if your weather app - again, what apps, specifically, are you having issues with? - is using hundreds of MBS, maybe it's doing a lot more (like live radar or videos), or maybe it's just crap and you should uninstall it.
Old faithful said:
Fact is, apart from media such as youtube and other streaming sites, text based information (or information update using apps that are supposed to have built in presentation such as snow fluries for "snow") should require very little data, typically 1KB per full size page. You have to admit that something is wrong with this picture that when I read a 500 word article it requires the same amount of bandwidth as the contents of a whole book!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are tilting at windmills. The average page size is pushing 1.5mb, and was more than 1k back in the Netscape beta days (15k average ~1995).
It's not uncommon for a http HEADER to be bigger than 1k.
Old faithful said:
They do make our lives simpler and there is a trade-off, agreed. The point I make is where the line should be crossed. Are we willing to get shoved with 99% non content garbage in order to access the remaining 1% meaningful content? Because that is certainly the going rate for full websites such as cnet, tech republic and others, and when looking at background data on Android, at least from my perspective. I was online back in 1993 when the www started (before on Co$tly Compuserve) and with the limited technology we had at the time we could get access to more meaningful content faster than we can now, and with very, very limited bandwidth!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your looking at the past through rose colored glasses if you remember more meaningful content being available in 1993. In mid 1993, there were 130 webpages, total. End of 1993, around 1000. End of 1994, around 10000. And a lot of them were useless crap that students were putting up (I know, I was one of them).
Old faithful said:
Ok, ok, enough of the oldtimer rant Maybe you are right and I'm just an old fool. But I'd rather be considered an old fool for asking stupid questions than to accept it all without any question
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not about accepting it without question. It's mainly you haven't given much specifics, so the only general answer is, well, it's for convenience, so turn off your data if you're worried. The details you did give - email and weather - it's very clear why they would use background data.
---------- Post added at 12:36 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:18 PM ----------
Regarding your other points:
Old faithful said:
Great to know! But you must admit that having to ask, or more precisely not being told where it is, is disturbing! Because what is more important than your data? WHY does it have to be so difficult to get to it? Why the secrecy? Don't users deserve to know where their files are and be able to select where to store them? Why am I not AUTOMATICALLY given the CHOICE as to its name and its location on my device?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That you didn't know where it was doesn't mean it is hidden or a secret; guidelines are published and clear, and apps generally follow them. You're not given a choice in name and location for simplicity.
Old faithful said:
True, but why is such an essential function NOT part of the OS and what more, why does it require the user to VIOLATE his warranty (by rooting) to do so? Don't you see what's WRONG with this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Commonly claimed, but rooting does not void your warranty. Problems you cause by rooting will do not need to be honored by the warranty.
Old faithful said:
Again, I understand; but doing so often breaks the apps. WHY do we need these permissions IMPOSED upon us in the first place? Doesn't it strike you as WRONG that so many apps need to access your most private information?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No app imposes anything on you - apps require the permissions they do and they're spelled out before you install. Don't install apps that required permissions thou don't like.
Old faithful said:
And coming back to the Google Play Store: I've used my device for two months and had to wipe it clean TWICE already and EVERY TIME because the Play Store refused to work anymore! Don't you think there's something wrong with this picture? Doesn't it hint at some homeland-security-esque infiltration deep into the OS from the part of Google?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sounds like your phone is broken. Get a replacement under warranty.