Disabling an app in Android will uninstall the full app downloaded from the play store, revert to just he shell app that ships on the phone, and prevent it from executing.
If you're worried about spying then maybe you should look into the options that actually exist to control your phone rather than just expecting someone to ship something to suit your specific tastes out of the box.
That isn't entirely true. The Facebook app installed on the phone is nothing more than a small shell that triggers the actual Facebook app to download from the Playstore when you first log into your google account.
Disabling the app literally frees up hundreds of MB from your phone for this reason.
i would feel a lot better about my phone if i could completely remove all of that facebook kludge completely
Why would that make you feel better? The default install is nothing but a shell and doesn't do anything without an update from the play store. By disabling something in Android it is unable to perform any function including updating itself. Why would you feel differently about it not existing vs being so incredibly irrelevant?
if Samsung does not fix this so i can remove them i wont be buying another Samsung phone
Thanks for your virtue signalling. Facebook has been an irremovable app since the original Galaxy S came to the market. If you actually cared about this you wouldn't have a Samsung phone now 10 years later.
I don't know why we are duping these articles but I'm sure this was posted in 2009 not 2019.
Like seriously: User suddenly discovers something that has been the same and unchanged for 10 years. Instant outrage!.
Just disable the app like a normal person and like every Android system has allowed since like version 5. The default "Facebook" install on these phones is a shell app that takes up almost no space. You actually need to download some +100MB from the Playstore for it to even work in the first place.
I must say, you make for a very in depth look at astroturfer's handbook on how to handle being caught astroturfing.
Whatever man. One day you may be enlightened enough to realise that people who disagree with you aren't on the take and that you're have in fact just been talking shit all this time.
Cool story, when NVIDIA releases a successor you should bring this up. In the meantime the GTX 1060 6GB has an MSRP $70 higher than that, and the founders edition is $300. Then when you look at an RTX 2060 you'll see there's only a minor increase in price for performance that rivals the Ti version of the next model up previously at a price that is $50 lower than that RRP.
If you want to talk about mid-low tier cards why are you in a discussion about a raytracing specialty product? The GTX 1160 will be released sometime soon.
Low end card 50-100 Mid range card 100-200 High end card 200+
Oooh cool arbitrary numbers!
This is too expensive to call mid range
NVIDIA agrees with you which is why it is an RTX card and why they said they intend to continue to the GTX series for the mid and low range.
It's not about the performance level
If you're not balancing price vs performance what is your decider? That it gets delivered in a pink box with fairy dust? That it has a RGB LED on the side?
There was no 75% price increase. The RTX2060 has a 40% price decrease for similar performance, quite the same as the previous gen cards when rolled out. And while you keep using the term "mid-end" you continue to ignore the fact that just because there's a 60 in the number the product mix has changed and it is not a mid end card though it will be joined by a mid end card with a 60 after it sometime early this year.
If you're going to call someone dumb it pays to actually have a clue first.
Because this most certainly isn't xx60 series in anything but name. It's xx70 in terms of price and maybe, perhaps, performance.
How is that fact astroturfing when it has been the arguement from the beginning including that of reviewers and including that of NVIDIA itself who say RTX are for the foreseeable future premium graphics cards? Your argument is fundamentally the same as mine right up until you got to the following line:
1060 is still where value proposition is.
You're having a different discussion. The topic at hand is the value proposition of the current upgrade choices. Your solution is not to upgrade. Your solution doesn't belong in this discussion. I don't disagree with it mind you. I see neither sense nor interest in upgrading to an RTX series of cards. But if you want to change the entire argument to technology isn't advancing enough then I'll happily stand by you, but that is not the discussion here.
Something I can say with authority as someone who bought both x60 and x70 cards depending on needs in the past.
Congrats, that puts you in the top 50th percentile of people who have made that choice. You're not an authority on it, you're a commoner, evidently one with the same tastes as me since I also have several 1060 and 1070 (including a Ti) card. And if you feel like you're best served with a previous gen card then a 6GB 1060 is definitely the sweet spot of the previous generation, though any partially serious gamer would be hard pressed considering anything lower than a 1070ti.
In fact I would say 4GB minimum for sane android use these days.
Based on what? Experience with a shitty phone? Android's RAM requirements are dependent on the rendering resolution which for TV interfaces is not very high. For a TV interface which renders at 1080p 512MB of RAM is fine for Android. "Oh but look at the RAM usage idle on my phone!" Well Android actually takes that into account just fine and on devices with less than 1GB of RAM you have to set ActivityManager.isLowRamDevice() = True which causes the system not to cache every bloody app.
The real problem is garbage coders, but more than that it's a TV. Just because it runs Android doesn't make it your multi purpose general pocket computer that people expect to use for multi-tasking. Really there's no reason why 4GB of RAM is required on a TV, definitely not because it uses Android. Hell 4GB is more than enough to get a full blown Windows 10 machine running butter smooth 4K to a display. And that bloated piece of shit (windows) should not be a benchmark.
It's rare to see such a direct admission of being an astroturfer. Thanks. I laughed.
Well if you want to spend twice as much money for marginally incremental performance more power to you. NVIDIA's stocks could use all the help it can get right now.
Or are you somehow delusional enough to think the xx60 series has ever not been the best in terms of value proposition? If so laugh away in your ignorance.
Oooh I know this one. The answer is "not relevant"! What do I win?
And if you think otherwise it would be a good idea to start looking into what has happened in technology development, performance, and dollars in the past 10 years, and then do your favorite activity: extrapolate. You may find you hit the $350 launch price.
I'm not confusing anything. Create a simple Class-A amp, parallel the output stages, apply global feedback and you do have high quality. I don't know why you think it needs to be complex. Designing a power amplifier capable of driving loads of current into 4ohm with low THD and ~100MHz bandwidth is *trivial*. You're making this something it's not.
It's laughable that you think that because switching can be complex and reserved for the later part of a degree that it's complex to use.
I didn't say it's complex because it's reserved for a later part of the degree. It's complex because it's complex. The signal path is complex the design is complex. Just because you outsourced the design effort to TI doesn't make it any less complex. Someone still designed a complicated modulation scheme with feedback and filtering that puts even the most complicated amplifier impedance interactions to shame.
Whoever said from scratch?
I've heard of moving goalposts. But you could at least keep them in the same stadium.
Quite. You don't realise how easy it is
Oh no I do. You don't realise just how difficult it is to make a switching system work well across the audio bandwidth. Don't worry though, actual high end companies know which is why they design a unique amplifier for each driver on their speakers with different switching characteristics, different filtering, different feedback loops etc. The fact that you think Class-D is easy while Class-A is difficult to make sound good just shows you have no clue what so ever about Audio design.
You think 4-6 discrete components will give you a high linearity amp?
I didn't say 4-6 discrete components. In fact there's more components than that in just a long-tailed pair input stage, and more in a decent CCS. It's quite clear you have no idea what you're talking about if you somehow think I said 4-6 component, or for some reason think that what I listed isn't the fundamental setup of every amplifier even you fancy $15k monoblocks.
You also forgot your heatsinks
I did nothing of the sort. You never specified small or cool in your original design criteria.
and haven't paid any attention to avoid coupling of noise into the analogue signal
I don't think you know what that means, and if you're talking about high PSRR typical designs based on the blocks I mentioned will quite happily have >90dB PSRR which is also why when you rip apart a Class A amplifier you won't find a voltage regulator anywhere. A simple CRC filter and the resulting system noise is happily down in the irrelevant regime.
I did. And my output is much more linear than yours.
hahahhahaahah. Wonderful. A claim based on no knowledge what so ever.
Now if you'll excuse me I'm going to Bestbuy to "design myself" an amplifier.
This card is priced almost the same as 1070 on launch two years ago. Linear time exists, as does moore's law.
This is a "mid end card" with high end pricing..
And yet in the past 2 years there was a very non-linear behavior in pricing that prevented a massive linear time drop. And by all accounts it's not the successor to the mid-end card. The RTX 2060 will be joined by another xx60 card which will actually be the mid-end card based on NVIDIA's announcements so far.
Ergo, it's massively overpriced.
That will only be shown proven if it fails to sell. I presents a far better value proposition than the 2070 and 2080, and both of those cards are selling very well.
Ergo current state of nvidia stock.
If you think NVIDIA's stock has to do with the price of the RTX line then you really have not been paying attention to the market.
Because 1) the X60 cards have cost $200-$250 the past several generations
And? Price / performance has increased and the product mix has changed. The RTX 2060 by all accounts will not be the direct successor to the GTX 2060.
and 2) the bump in performance/dollar is low, compared to what we got last generation.
You subscribe to the theory of endless exponential growth?
The most recent rumors I've heard are that Navi will only cover the mid-range, i.e. where the 2060 lives, but for lower cost than the Vega cards. This may lead to a price drop for the 2060 (or more likely, an 1160 reveal), but the 2070+ would remain unopposed.
and can open just about any email without infecting the thing.
Why are you letting viruses get all the way to the point where they can be executed? What are you doing wrong? Why isn't your mail scanned in transit? Why isn't your virus scanner picking it up as it enters the inbox? Why isn't your email client preventing the execution of files? Please don't setup your email systems like we did in the 90s.
As a non-techie she is not likely to go out looking for shady shit to download. The perceived risk / benefits are almost non-existent on a work machine. If anything it's usually the partially techie types who are more experimental and who you have to worry about.
That said the biggest risk to any company these days is phishing related scams, and Linux is in no way immune from these.
A lot of Slashdot comments here are saying the card is too expensive without justifying why. The RTX 2060 matches or significantly outperforms the GTX 1070 Ti depending on the load and is priced at about $100 lower RRP. This is quite the opposite to the ludicrous launch prices of the RTX 2070 and RTX 2080.
At the same time it's worth remembering that this is not a low end card and rumours are the non-RTX line will continue to develop with a cheaper GTX 1160 in the works to say nothing of the even cheaper cards NVIDIA has on the market.
Now with all that said and done, rumours also say that AMD is about to eat nvidia's lunch. AMD has confirmed that Navi won't raytrace but so far every rumour also says that it will double the price performance ratio of NVIDIA's cards, and my guess is when that happens we should actually have a justified reason to call all the NVIDIA cards overpriced including the RTX 2060.
Slashdot Mirror
Disabling an app in Android will uninstall the full app downloaded from the play store, revert to just he shell app that ships on the phone, and prevent it from executing.
If you're worried about spying then maybe you should look into the options that actually exist to control your phone rather than just expecting someone to ship something to suit your specific tastes out of the box.
Nope, it was like this on my original Galaxy S.
except it doesn't free up any storage space
That isn't entirely true. The Facebook app installed on the phone is nothing more than a small shell that triggers the actual Facebook app to download from the Playstore when you first log into your google account.
Disabling the app literally frees up hundreds of MB from your phone for this reason.
i would feel a lot better about my phone if i could completely remove all of that facebook kludge completely
Why would that make you feel better? The default install is nothing but a shell and doesn't do anything without an update from the play store. By disabling something in Android it is unable to perform any function including updating itself. Why would you feel differently about it not existing vs being so incredibly irrelevant?
if Samsung does not fix this so i can remove them i wont be buying another Samsung phone
Thanks for your virtue signalling. Facebook has been an irremovable app since the original Galaxy S came to the market. If you actually cared about this you wouldn't have a Samsung phone now 10 years later.
I don't know why we are duping these articles but I'm sure this was posted in 2009 not 2019.
Like seriously: User suddenly discovers something that has been the same and unchanged for 10 years. Instant outrage!.
Just disable the app like a normal person and like every Android system has allowed since like version 5. The default "Facebook" install on these phones is a shell app that takes up almost no space. You actually need to download some +100MB from the Playstore for it to even work in the first place.
Yeah a piece of plastic with a few very heavy iron cores that travel at high speed and do wonders when they impact planes.
"Wow is that a bullet coming towards me! Stop!"
A goose does less damage and they are harder to regulate.
I'm also thinking most of them would cause less damage to a jet than a goose strike would.
Based on what? Certainly not physics which includes things like mass and density.
the Brits are even in more trouble than we thought.
Implying that flying a drone around Orly or LAX wouldn't have the same effect?
5G has a minimum speed specification which this doesn't meet.
This is how the world ends. Not in a nuclear explosion but in stupification of people to the point where they can only communicate in memes.
I must say, you make for a very in depth look at astroturfer's handbook on how to handle being caught astroturfing.
Whatever man. One day you may be enlightened enough to realise that people who disagree with you aren't on the take and that you're have in fact just been talking shit all this time.
Have a good day.
GTX 1060 3 GB had 200 USD MSRP two years ago.
Cool story, when NVIDIA releases a successor you should bring this up. In the meantime the GTX 1060 6GB has an MSRP $70 higher than that, and the founders edition is $300. Then when you look at an RTX 2060 you'll see there's only a minor increase in price for performance that rivals the Ti version of the next model up previously at a price that is $50 lower than that RRP.
If you want to talk about mid-low tier cards why are you in a discussion about a raytracing specialty product? The GTX 1160 will be released sometime soon.
Low end card 50-100
Mid range card 100-200
High end card 200+
Oooh cool arbitrary numbers!
This is too expensive to call mid range
NVIDIA agrees with you which is why it is an RTX card and why they said they intend to continue to the GTX series for the mid and low range.
It's not about the performance level
If you're not balancing price vs performance what is your decider? That it gets delivered in a pink box with fairy dust? That it has a RGB LED on the side?
There was no 75% price increase. The RTX2060 has a 40% price decrease for similar performance, quite the same as the previous gen cards when rolled out. And while you keep using the term "mid-end" you continue to ignore the fact that just because there's a 60 in the number the product mix has changed and it is not a mid end card though it will be joined by a mid end card with a 60 after it sometime early this year.
If you're going to call someone dumb it pays to actually have a clue first.
Because this most certainly isn't xx60 series in anything but name. It's xx70 in terms of price and maybe, perhaps, performance.
How is that fact astroturfing when it has been the arguement from the beginning including that of reviewers and including that of NVIDIA itself who say RTX are for the foreseeable future premium graphics cards? Your argument is fundamentally the same as mine right up until you got to the following line:
1060 is still where value proposition is.
You're having a different discussion. The topic at hand is the value proposition of the current upgrade choices. Your solution is not to upgrade. Your solution doesn't belong in this discussion. I don't disagree with it mind you. I see neither sense nor interest in upgrading to an RTX series of cards. But if you want to change the entire argument to technology isn't advancing enough then I'll happily stand by you, but that is not the discussion here.
Something I can say with authority as someone who bought both x60 and x70 cards depending on needs in the past.
Congrats, that puts you in the top 50th percentile of people who have made that choice. You're not an authority on it, you're a commoner, evidently one with the same tastes as me since I also have several 1060 and 1070 (including a Ti) card. And if you feel like you're best served with a previous gen card then a 6GB 1060 is definitely the sweet spot of the previous generation, though any partially serious gamer would be hard pressed considering anything lower than a 1070ti.
In fact I would say 4GB minimum for sane android use these days.
Based on what? Experience with a shitty phone? Android's RAM requirements are dependent on the rendering resolution which for TV interfaces is not very high. For a TV interface which renders at 1080p 512MB of RAM is fine for Android. "Oh but look at the RAM usage idle on my phone!" Well Android actually takes that into account just fine and on devices with less than 1GB of RAM you have to set ActivityManager.isLowRamDevice() = True which causes the system not to cache every bloody app.
The real problem is garbage coders, but more than that it's a TV. Just because it runs Android doesn't make it your multi purpose general pocket computer that people expect to use for multi-tasking. Really there's no reason why 4GB of RAM is required on a TV, definitely not because it uses Android. Hell 4GB is more than enough to get a full blown Windows 10 machine running butter smooth 4K to a display. And that bloated piece of shit (windows) should not be a benchmark.
It's rare to see such a direct admission of being an astroturfer. Thanks. I laughed.
Well if you want to spend twice as much money for marginally incremental performance more power to you. NVIDIA's stocks could use all the help it can get right now.
Or are you somehow delusional enough to think the xx60 series has ever not been the best in terms of value proposition? If so laugh away in your ignorance.
Oooh I know this one. The answer is "not relevant"! What do I win?
And if you think otherwise it would be a good idea to start looking into what has happened in technology development, performance, and dollars in the past 10 years, and then do your favorite activity: extrapolate. You may find you hit the $350 launch price.
I'm not confusing anything. Create a simple Class-A amp, parallel the output stages, apply global feedback and you do have high quality. I don't know why you think it needs to be complex. Designing a power amplifier capable of driving loads of current into 4ohm with low THD and ~100MHz bandwidth is *trivial*. You're making this something it's not.
It's laughable that you think that because switching can be complex and reserved for the later part of a degree that it's complex to use.
I didn't say it's complex because it's reserved for a later part of the degree. It's complex because it's complex. The signal path is complex the design is complex. Just because you outsourced the design effort to TI doesn't make it any less complex. Someone still designed a complicated modulation scheme with feedback and filtering that puts even the most complicated amplifier impedance interactions to shame.
Whoever said from scratch?
I've heard of moving goalposts. But you could at least keep them in the same stadium.
Quite. You don't realise how easy it is
Oh no I do. You don't realise just how difficult it is to make a switching system work well across the audio bandwidth. Don't worry though, actual high end companies know which is why they design a unique amplifier for each driver on their speakers with different switching characteristics, different filtering, different feedback loops etc. The fact that you think Class-D is easy while Class-A is difficult to make sound good just shows you have no clue what so ever about Audio design.
You think 4-6 discrete components will give you a high linearity amp?
I didn't say 4-6 discrete components. In fact there's more components than that in just a long-tailed pair input stage, and more in a decent CCS. It's quite clear you have no idea what you're talking about if you somehow think I said 4-6 component, or for some reason think that what I listed isn't the fundamental setup of every amplifier even you fancy $15k monoblocks.
You also forgot your heatsinks
I did nothing of the sort. You never specified small or cool in your original design criteria.
and haven't paid any attention to avoid coupling of noise into the analogue signal
I don't think you know what that means, and if you're talking about high PSRR typical designs based on the blocks I mentioned will quite happily have >90dB PSRR which is also why when you rip apart a Class A amplifier you won't find a voltage regulator anywhere. A simple CRC filter and the resulting system noise is happily down in the irrelevant regime.
I did. And my output is much more linear than yours.
hahahhahaahah. Wonderful. A claim based on no knowledge what so ever.
Now if you'll excuse me I'm going to Bestbuy to "design myself" an amplifier.
This card is priced almost the same as 1070 on launch two years ago. Linear time exists, as does moore's law.
This is a "mid end card" with high end pricing..
And yet in the past 2 years there was a very non-linear behavior in pricing that prevented a massive linear time drop. And by all accounts it's not the successor to the mid-end card. The RTX 2060 will be joined by another xx60 card which will actually be the mid-end card based on NVIDIA's announcements so far.
Ergo, it's massively overpriced.
That will only be shown proven if it fails to sell. I presents a far better value proposition than the 2070 and 2080, and both of those cards are selling very well.
Ergo current state of nvidia stock.
If you think NVIDIA's stock has to do with the price of the RTX line then you really have not been paying attention to the market.
Because 1) the X60 cards have cost $200-$250 the past several generations
And? Price / performance has increased and the product mix has changed. The RTX 2060 by all accounts will not be the direct successor to the GTX 2060.
and 2) the bump in performance/dollar is low, compared to what we got last generation.
You subscribe to the theory of endless exponential growth?
The most recent rumors I've heard are that Navi will only cover the mid-range, i.e. where the 2060 lives, but for lower cost than the Vega cards. This may lead to a price drop for the 2060 (or more likely, an 1160 reveal), but the 2070+ would remain unopposed.
Quite possibly. We'll see how it turns out.
And yet we have increased performance at a lower price point, Linear time shows it's just fine. Unless you subscribe to the theory of endless growth.
and can open just about any email without infecting the thing.
Why are you letting viruses get all the way to the point where they can be executed? What are you doing wrong? Why isn't your mail scanned in transit? Why isn't your virus scanner picking it up as it enters the inbox? Why isn't your email client preventing the execution of files? Please don't setup your email systems like we did in the 90s.
As a non-techie she is not likely to go out looking for shady shit to download. The perceived risk / benefits are almost non-existent on a work machine. If anything it's usually the partially techie types who are more experimental and who you have to worry about.
That said the biggest risk to any company these days is phishing related scams, and Linux is in no way immune from these.
A lot of Slashdot comments here are saying the card is too expensive without justifying why. The RTX 2060 matches or significantly outperforms the GTX 1070 Ti depending on the load and is priced at about $100 lower RRP. This is quite the opposite to the ludicrous launch prices of the RTX 2070 and RTX 2080.
At the same time it's worth remembering that this is not a low end card and rumours are the non-RTX line will continue to develop with a cheaper GTX 1160 in the works to say nothing of the even cheaper cards NVIDIA has on the market.
Now with all that said and done, rumours also say that AMD is about to eat nvidia's lunch. AMD has confirmed that Navi won't raytrace but so far every rumour also says that it will double the price performance ratio of NVIDIA's cards, and my guess is when that happens we should actually have a justified reason to call all the NVIDIA cards overpriced including the RTX 2060.