Would you file an FTC or FCC complaint for Android T-Mobile

[TJ]

On 04/05/2014 04:02 PM, Danny D. wrote:

I keep beating my head against the wall, chastising myself for buying
the thing. It's my fault. I do agree. I was stupid. I agree. I'm an
idiot for buying this phone because I *thought* the sd card would hold
apps (it did for my Gingerbread Android phone, for example).

My key question is HOW do you guys seem to inherently *know* that the
sd card can't hold apps?

I always thought it did?
How did *you* know that it didn't?

Note: The carrier never told me this until it was too late.

In my case, it comes from knowing how Linux works. While not precisely
Linux, Android is a very close relative.

In Linux, every app, file, etc. has permissions attached to it. The user
(you) doesn't have permission to manipulate apps that are owned by root
(T-Mobile, on your phone) unless root specifically gives that
permission. In general, apps the user installs belong to the user, and
apps installed by root belong to root. That's why you can't move apps to
the external SD card - they don't belong to you. They belong to root.
(T-Mobile)

Google has no say over who "root" is. If you "root" your phone, you
aren't breaking away from Google, you're breaking away from T-Mobile. If
I were to root my tablet, I'd be breaking away from Hannspree.

But rooting isn't for everybody. Being root gives you absolute power
over your phone. That includes, along with the power to uninstall any
app or move it wherever you care to, the power to wipe the OS right off
with a very simple command line command. That's the reason for the
permissions - so that users who don't know what they are doing can't
accidentally mess up the whole system.

TJ

 

[Danny D.]

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 15:08:04 -0700, nobody wrote:

http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2439667

The same site has a forum for the L9. People there can tell you
whatever you want to know.

Thanks for that suggestion.

I've registered an account, and am voraciously reading up on how
to root this thing without bricking it.

I also see that cyanogenmod might give me a smaller Android
footprint, so, my overall goal might be three steps.

1. Root the phone
2. Replace the OS with a small cyanogenmod footprint
3. Add only the apps that I need or want

This might make the 600MB into a usable 2GB or so, if I'm
lucky ...

 

[Danny D.]

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 14:54:21 -0700, nobody wrote:

And why no whining about RAM? My first smartphone had 4GB storage and
512MB RAM. The problem with it was the limited RAM, maiking you stop
applications to run others.

I did see on the forum.xda-developers.com site you had kindly
suggested that there are ways to format the SD card so that
it acts as RAM, so, that's one possible way for me to add
what they called "virtual memory".

 

[Danny D.]

On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 09:19:11 -0400, TJ wrote:

> Strong suggestion: Learn from your experience.

The bad news is that nobody would buy this LG Optimus L9
if they truthfully advertised it's a 600MB phone for apps.

The result of that bad news is that I can't use the phone
as it is (i.e., out of the box), since it is a 600MB phone
for apps (even with the 32 GB SDcard).

So, the good news implication is that, even if I brick it,
I haven't lost anything, since the phone is worthless from
the get go.

All I can do is make a worthless phone less worthless or
more worthless, depending on the outcome of my cyanogenmod
efforts ...

I'm trying to line up my ducks with this tutorial:
http://www.androidrooting.com/how-to-root-lg-optimus-l9-p769-very-easily/

 

[TJ]

On 04/05/2014 10:27 PM, Danny D. wrote:

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 15:08:04 -0700, nobody wrote:

http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2439667

The same site has a forum for the L9. People there can tell you
whatever you want to know.

Thanks for that suggestion.

I've registered an account, and am voraciously reading up on how
to root this thing without bricking it.

I also see that cyanogenmod might give me a smaller Android
footprint, so, my overall goal might be three steps.

1. Root the phone
2. Replace the OS with a small cyanogenmod footprint
3. Add only the apps that I need or want

This might make the 600MB into a usable 2GB or so, if I'm
lucky ...

Strong suggestion: Learn from your experience. Your basic problem came
from making assumptions without acquiring sufficient knowledge. In
short, you didn't do your homework before you acted.

That practice can be fatal to your phone if you act as root. I'm not
trying to scare you away from rooting your phone and doing what you
propose, as I know enough to know that I don't know enough to pass
judgment on your proposal. I'm only saying that you should be extremely
cautious. Find out the pitfalls (there are ALWAYS pitfalls) of what you
want to do, especially if you make a mistake.

I've been a Linux user for 12 years, and have acted as root on my own
systems many times. I don't fear it, but I have a healthy respect for
the power. I have messed things up royally, but not before I had a
recovery plan in place. Be aware that even with that experience, or
maybe because of it, I wouldn't attempt what you are proposing to do
unless it was either that or the recyclers for the phone, and even then
wouldn't attempt it after only a few minutes of online reading.

Also, make sure the online information you are reading is current -
information from as little as a year ago might now be outdated. Things
are developing that fast. Faster.

Good luck.

TJ

 

[Danny D.]

On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 12:23:31 -0400, John McGaw wrote:

I'd have to start by blaming myself for not doing a bit of basic
research before the act. Whinging afterward seldom does any good.

Do you really consider it "basic research" to know that the phone
only has 600MB of usable storage space for apps?

How are you supposed to find this out, if neither LG nor T-Mobile
will tell you?

 

[John McGaw]

On 4/4/2014 11:55 AM, Danny D. wrote:

Long story short, I believe T-Mobile lied to the consumer by claiming
the LG Optimus F3 and LG Optimus L9 have both 4GB of internal memory
and that they can use up to a 32 GB external microsd card.

Without arguing why I feel that way, I just wish to ask here whether
the complaint rightly goes to the FTC or to the FCC?

On the one hand, it's (grossly) false and misleading advertising.
On the other hand, it's a communication device.

Whom would you file the complaint to?
How?

I would complain to neither since both claims seem to be literally true. If
I made such a purchase and wanted somebody to blame for the results then
I'd have to start by blaming myself for not doing a bit of basic research
before the act. Whinging afterward seldom does any good.

 

On Sun, 6 Apr 2014 15:43:27 +0000 (UTC), "Danny D."
<dannyd@is.invalid> wrote:

On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 09:19:11 -0400, TJ wrote:

Strong suggestion: Learn from your experience.

The bad news is that nobody would buy this LG Optimus L9
if they truthfully advertised it's a 600MB phone for apps.

No, you wouldn't buy it if you had known that. Tens of thousands of
people own an L9 and don't see any significant number of them crying
fraud or deceptive practices. There's a reason it's a $180 phone and
not a $600 one.

The result of that bad news is that I can't use the phone
as it is (i.e., out of the box), since it is a 600MB phone
for apps (even with the 32 GB SDcard).

Yes you can use it for quite a few apps even with only 600MB ROM. You
want to use it for some apps that use an inordinate amount of space
for storing maps. My first Android phone had 1GB ROM and 512MB RAM.
It was usable for a lot of things. In fact I found the RAM size the
bigger problem. You can also have small footprint apps that will kill
the apps not currently running and take up space, freeing it for
something else. (I like Andorid Assistant)

So, the good news implication is that, even if I brick it,
I haven't lost anything, since the phone is worthless from
the get go.

You've lost the value of the phone on the market. Lots of people would
like to buy it as is. It's actually a lot of phone for it's price. I
have recommended this phone to over a dozen people because for their
meeds it's a great phone.

All I can do is make a worthless phone less worthless or
more worthless, depending on the outcome of my cyanogenmod
efforts ...

Or you could just sell it on eBay or Craigslist and cough up the extra
$299-300 for a phone that suits your needs.

I'm trying to line up my ducks with this tutorial:
http://www.androidrooting.com/how-to-root-lg-optimus-l9-p769-very-easily/

And be sure you get one on how to restore the stock ROM if you ever
want to sell it.

 

On Sun, 6 Apr 2014 18:11:55 +0000 (UTC), "Danny D."
<dannyd@is.invalid> wrote:

On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 12:23:31 -0400, John McGaw wrote:

I'd have to start by blaming myself for not doing a bit of basic
research before the act. Whinging afterward seldom does any good.

Do you really consider it "basic research" to know that the phone
only has 600MB of usable storage space for apps?

How are you supposed to find this out, if neither LG nor T-Mobile
will tell you?

Try posting the question on any or all of the several L9 specific
forums.

 

[Arfa Daily]

"Danny D." <dannyd@is.invalid> wrote in message
news:lhphmj$jmv$3@speranza.aioe.org...

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 14:47:53 +0100, Arfa Daily wrote:

I managed to shift a couple of apps to the
card, and that freed up enough space to keep me going,

I can't shift *any* of the pre-installed apps to the SD card!
The settings apps button doesn't have a MOVE (or delete).
How can you do that?

When I called LG, just now, at 800-243-0000, the representative
(Leyda, in Mobile Communications Support) said that,
after Ice Cream Sandwich, Google (not LG) disabled the ability
to load apps onto the SD card, and also removed the ability to
MOVE apps to the SD card.

So, if that's true, how did you move apps to the SD card?
(I'm so confused.)

The couple of apps that I managed to move were ones that I had put on there
myself. One was a utility to better control sounds and indications of
events - the default one treated every event pretty much the same, playing
the incoming text tune for them all - and a better texting app than the
default one. Unfortunately, that actually doesn't work well, because despite
it supposedly being selectable, the default text app won't stop being the
default, so any incoming texts now sound the tone twice as they get loaded
into both apps. This is a bit of a pain, as you then have to read them in
both apps, otherwise, one or other of them will keep bleating at you that
you have unread messages ... :-\

I had both of these apps loaded on my previous Android smartphone, which was
an HTC, and they worked just fine.

Arfa

 

[Arfa Daily]

"John McGaw" <Nobody@Nowh.ere> wrote in message
news:_cf0v.16084$Va6.4717@fx21.iad...

On 4/4/2014 11:55 AM, Danny D. wrote:
Long story short, I believe T-Mobile lied to the consumer by claiming
the LG Optimus F3 and LG Optimus L9 have both 4GB of internal memory
and that they can use up to a 32 GB external microsd card.

Without arguing why I feel that way, I just wish to ask here whether
the complaint rightly goes to the FTC or to the FCC?

On the one hand, it's (grossly) false and misleading advertising.
On the other hand, it's a communication device.

Whom would you file the complaint to?
How?


I would complain to neither since both claims seem to be literally true.
If I made such a purchase and wanted somebody to blame for the results
then I'd have to start by blaming myself for not doing a bit of basic
research before the act. Whinging afterward seldom does any good.

I don't know about the U.S., but here in the UK, the mobile phone business
seems to be the modern day equivalent of the dodgy car dealers of the past.
Whilst you might well say that it is the OP's fault that he didn't do enough
research, I have to say that I have a degree of sympathy with him. The
claims being made by the people who sold him the phone are, in my opinion,
misleading at a minimum, and bordering on bare faced lies at worst. It's
also fine for the other good folk on here who really understand about phones
to deride the OP for his lack of knowledge, but it could just as easily be a
similar situation with some other product for them.

I consider myself to be an intelligent and tech-savvy person - I repair
electronic equipment for a living, and have done for 45 years - but I also
got caught by exactly the same problem as the OP, although for my useage, I
was able to get around it enough without it rendering the phone useless to
me.

So, what is the rationale behind the root owners 'locking' this bloatware so
that you can't at least move it if not delete it, or why put it on there in
the first place ? Do they get paid by the originators to put it on there,
and make sure it stays on there ? And if you are going to go to the trouble
of designing in additional external memory capability, why not allow its
full useage for anything other than storing photos on ?

So yes, I quite understand where the OP is coming from on this one, and why
he feels that he has been misled as to the capabilities of his phone for the
purposes that he needs - particularly after he took the trouble to ask those
who *should* have known, and who *should* have been able to advise him with
regard to the true amount of app storage available to him, and the
restricted storage abilities of the SD card as an augmentation of the
internal storage.

Arfa

 

[Chris Uppal]

Arfa Daily wrote:

So yes, I quite understand where the OP is coming from on this one, and
why he feels that he has been misled as to the capabilities of his phone
for the purposes that he needs - particularly after he took the trouble
to ask those who *should* have known, and who *should* have been able to
advise him with regard to the true amount of app storage available to
him, and the restricted storage abilities of the SD card as an
augmentation of the internal storage.

Agreed: and when I buy a laptop (as I did) that advertised a 128 GB SSD, that
turns out to have 16 GB[*] reserved for a recovery partition (and a fair amount
of bloatware on the C: drive, to boot), then I feel that I've been lied to.
It's not that I can't fix it (I have), but I can't shop to /my/ best advantage
if the sellers twist the facts.

The position with phones is much the same, if not worse. On the little Samsung
phone I have (or rather: had until I bricked it) that came "free" with the
above laptop, there was so little space that, after I had added just /two/
small apps (a mapping app and a WiFi monitor) that it couldn't even update the
apps that Samsung had locked onto the phone ("Not enough space to update
YouTube", "Not enough space to update Google Hang-outs", ..) And, of course,
putting a 32GB SD card into it didn't help at all...

-- chris

 

[Aled Griffiths]

On Mon, 07 Apr 2014 05:29:08 -0700, dave scrit:

> Files are portable, apps are not. That is also standard.

Except in Android 2.x and in 4.3 and above.
Otherwise true.

 

[dave]

On 04/05/2014 08:44 AM, TJ wrote:

On 04/05/2014 10:47 AM, dave wrote:
On 04/05/2014 06:33 AM, TJ wrote:
On 04/05/2014 09:31 AM, TJ wrote:

Maybe even contact a US Senator looking to get re-elected. Try one of
mine, Chuck Schumer. He's always looking for causes to "investigate" to
get his name in the paper.


Wow. Really revealed my age on that one. I should have said, "in the
news."

TJ


What is the OP using to determine he can't use the memory outside the
phone? I've never seen that (except Apple junk).

He wants to move apps to his external card, mostly bloatware installed
as part of the system by T-Mobile, and the OS won't let him do so. So,
because he can't use it the way he wants to use it, he has declared it
"useless."

TJ

Files are portable, apps are not. That is also standard.

 

[dave]

On 04/07/2014 06:31 AM, Aled Griffiths wrote:

On Mon, 07 Apr 2014 05:29:08 -0700, dave scrit:

Files are portable, apps are not. That is also standard.

Except in Android 2.x and in 4.3 and above.
Otherwise true.

OK. I am using the free XP file manager you download from Samsung on my
only Windows device, a netbook with failing buttons. I don't even know
why I'd try to remove an ap. What for? I'm just glad I can drag and drop
songs and pictures. Or preload them onto the detachable memory..

Why does Android tell me they can't play .flac or .wav when they
actually can? In fact they tell you to transcode down before loading.
WTF? Almost all my files are from CDs and are lossless. Memory is cheap,
hearing is not. I do not store RAW photos. There are limits to my
self-indulgence.

 

[nospam]

In article <ye-dnck2adkFMd_OnZ2dnUVZ_qydnZ2d@earthlink.com>, dave
<ricketzz@earthlink.net> wrote:

Why does Android tell me they can't play .flac or .wav when they
actually can? In fact they tell you to transcode down before loading.
WTF? Almost all my files are from CDs and are lossless. Memory is cheap,
hearing is not. I do not store RAW photos. There are limits to my
self-indulgence.

hearing is definitely not lossless and grows worse as people age.

people can't hear a difference between a lossless audio file and a
properly done mp3/aac, especially at 256kbps or 320kbps.

they might think they can, but in a double-blind test, people have
consistently *not* been able to tell the difference. countless such
tests have been done, with many, many people.

there certainly isn't an audible difference on headphones or with the
built-in speakers of a device.

 

[The Real Bev]

On 04/05/2014 04:46 AM, Danny D. wrote:

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 02:58:57 +0100, Arfa Daily wrote:

The solution, of course, is to 'root' the phone.
Then you can do what you like with the storage ...

I've never rooted a phone, but, I may be forced to do so,
just to make the phone usable.

I do agree with you that *all* the preloaded apps won't allow
you to move them.

I guess if you could move them, you could delete them.

Mewonders if Google makes certain apps non-removable (e.g., Chrome)
because it's in there best interest. Yet, mewonders why
T-Mobile makes certain apps (e.g., T-Mobile TV) non-removable,
since there are plenty of their apps I'd never ever use but
I can't get rid of.

Chrome (the Android 'Browser') is much faster than firefox, but does NOT
allow adblock plus -- which I consider essential for any browsing I do,
especially with severely limited screen size.

There are always tradeoffs :-(

--
Cheers, Bev
======================================================
Guns kill people like spoons make Rosie O'Donnell fat.

 

[The Real Bev]

On 04/05/2014 04:49 AM, Danny D. wrote:

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 03:01:39 +0100, Arfa Daily wrote:

From my experience of the Android platform on phones, you won't find it is
much different from your experience with the T-Mobile phone, right across
the board.

I think the "problem" is that the "little lie" becomes a "big lie" the
closer your internal memory gets to 4GB.

For example, if they lie by 4GB in a 32GB phone, you still have a usable
28GB of "usable" memory.

Likewise, if they lie by 4GB in a 16GB or even 8GB phone, you still have
a usable 12GB and 4GB respectively.

But, if they lie by 4GB in a 4GB phone, you end up with a useless phone.

Compound that lie with the lie of the promise of the SD card, and you
are dead in the water with a phone you never would have bought, had the
carrier provided the truth when you looked up the specs and asked on
the phone about the "usable" memory.

A knowledgeable person might have defined 'usable' as 'usable for
downloading and running additional applications'; the problem is that
NOBODY is knowledgeable the first time they buy a smartphone...or
computer...or anything else that's fairly complex; there's always SOME
nasty surprise no matter how much research you do.

Had that been done I think T-Mobile wouldn't have had a leg to stand on,
especially if you'd recorded the conversation. I also think that the
helpdroid would have said exactly the same thing -- "Sure you can do it"
-- because he didn't expect to hear the qualifier. Sort of like WW2
'dazzle' paint on ships

--
Cheers, Bev
======================================================
Guns kill people like spoons make Rosie O'Donnell fat.

 

[The Real Bev]

On 04/05/2014 11:34 AM, Danny D. wrote:

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 09:24:32 -0400, TJ wrote:

Judging by that, I'd say that if the company reps said "usable" memory,
you haven't a leg to stand on. The memory on the phone is *usable." You
use it every time you turn the phone on. It's usefulness may be limited,
but that's different from "unusable." That's what the lawyers would
argue, anyway.

I do agree with you. I think my complaint won't carry much weight with
either the FTC or the FCC unless (and this is the biggie), unless I'm
not alone in considering this deceptive advertising.

For example, if hundreds or thousands of consumers complain with the same
complaint of deceptive advertising, then the FTC and/or FCC, I think,
would take it seriously.

If I'm the only one who is complaining of deceptive advertising, then,
I'm simply the one fool in the crowd who fell for it.

It's no different than when people complain about an automotive defect
or an advertising scam. If enough people complain about deceptive
advertising, the FTC and/or FCC will listen.

One complaint is just one disgruntled consumer.

HINT: If you feel like complaining, you get 1,000 characters on the
online FCC complaint form & 3,000 characters on the online FTC form:
FCC 888-225-5322 http://www.fcc.gov/complaints (deceptive advertising)
FTC 877-382-4357 https://www.ftccomplaintassistant.gov/Details#crnt

OK, I complained to both. The FTC complaint contained a bit of
clarification missing in my FCC complaint:

"When I was first interested in buying an Android cellphone, I
determined that I
wanted an external sdcard in order to NOT be limited by the internal
phone memory.
Every single provider of phones gives the amount of internal memory (in
my case,
4GB) along with the fact that a slot for an external SD card ("up to nn
GB") is
provided. No warning is given that it's not possible to move the included
applications or run new ones on the external SD card. Indeed, many of
the phones
themselves refer to their internal memory as "sdcard", which is completely
deceptive. If companies provide the amount of memory as a selling
point, which
they do, they should make it clear that 'usable' in terms of external
storage means
"NOT usable to run applications". Anything less is fraud.

If you like my complaint, feel free to use it or any part of it in your own.

--
Cheers, Bev
======================================================
Guns kill people like spoons make Rosie O'Donnell fat.

 

[The Real Bev]

On 04/05/2014 01:02 PM, Danny D. wrote:

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 14:25:37 -0500, Paul Miner wrote:

Can you expand a bit on why you feel that the phone is useless? Surely it
works as advertised, able to do everything it's supposed to do. Is it the
case that you have one or more apps in mind that you'd like to install, but
you can't because there isn't enough space available? If that's the case, I
don't think I would call it useless.

Hi Paul,
You are exactly right.

The phone is actually a fine phone, out of the box, for anyone who doesn't
wish to install any more than a total of 600 MB of applications (and their
data).

However, if the user wishes to install more than 600MB of applications
(and their data, such as offline maps), then the phone will not allow
that to happen.

So, it's useless (to me), from my standpoint, since I had *assumed*
that I could augment the admittedly puny 4GB of internal storage with
the 32 GB microSD card.

It turns out that this is, in effect, a 600MB (internal storage for
apps) phone.

Had I known that, I never would have purchased the phone.

I keep beating my head against the wall, chastising myself for buying
the thing. It's my fault. I do agree. I was stupid. I agree. I'm an
idiot for buying this phone because I *thought* the sd card would hold
apps (it did for my Gingerbread Android phone, for example).

My key question is HOW do you guys seem to inherently *know* that the
sd card can't hold apps?

I always thought it did?
How did *you* know that it didn't?

Note: The carrier never told me this until it was too late.

I did a lot of reading about cellphones, but NOWHERE did I see it
mentioned that external sdcards couldn't run applications. I didn't ask
anybody, I just read the specs. The BLU is a fine phone aside from this
monumental drawback, which is apparently universal.

I should have read this newsgroup before buying the phone. I've found
that people who review products in various "forums" and
sales/manufacturers' websites generally don't have a clue.

:-(

--
Cheers, Bev
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
"I read about this syndrome called hypochondria in a
magazine. I think I've got it." -- DA