Edit: I've checked with my wife who has an ad supported Kindle for over a year and keeps it in flight mode for months at a time. It never did that to her. So either Amazon changed that a long time ago, or I've believed a lie.
Worrying. "Flight" mode exists for a reason and should not be overridden.
Don't get me wrong the Kindle shouldn't do what it's doing but it's by no means a safety issue.
It's a totally different affair if you are receiving a signal by a 100 Watt transmitter at 10 Km or a signal from a 1 Watt transmitter at 5 meters distance. The 1 Watt transmitter will overpower anything in its band with great ease and any dirt on the spectral output will have the same effect in other bands. Note that most cellphones will crank up their output if they can't connect to a base station that they can receive.
Of course plane designers will still do what they can to reduce this nuisance but leaving our phone on makes it harder than it should be. Please turn your phone off or to airplane mode and consider it a very small price to pay for flying an airplane.
Yes, flight mode does matter, no it probably won't crash a plane but does it have to before you would consider following a very simple rule?
But, more importantly, it puts your phone's radio through an unusual high-power-draw situation that the phone's manufacturer may not have bothered testing for, which can make phone batteries explode that might not have otherwise ever exploded.
Oh, and also, a plane-load of people whose phones are all ranging hogs circuits on a bunch of towers at once (for no productive purpose, since the phones don't have high-enough SNR to actually communicate anything useful with any of the towers they can "see"), so the cellular service providers have politely asked the FAA to get people to not do that.
> The FAA did not consider changing the regulations regarding the use of cell phones for voice communications during flight because the issue is under the jurisdiction of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). The ARC did recommend that the FAA consult with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to review its current rules.
So it seems to be the FCC that has made this decision (in consultation with the FAA it sounds like).
[0] https://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsI...
2.7 million people fly on airplanes every day.
Even if you think the vast majority of them turn their phones off, it's still a huge number of people who don't.
Was on a full plane from CA to TX a while back. During the final landing approach I heard dozens of alerts as the plane got nearer to the ground.
Nobody cared one bit.
That sounded way too low so I checked -- I think your number is US domestic flights, worldwide we have about 12.6 million daily passengers.
If airplanes could be brought down by turning on a cellphone you would never have been allowed to travel with one in the first place.
As others suggested: it was an app-supported Kindle indeed. So it's not like Amazon went crazy unprovoked evil or something.
Edit: I've checked with my wife who has an ad supported Kindle for over a year and keeps it in flight mode for months at a time. It never did that to her. So either Amazon changed that a long time ago, or I've believed a lie.
What's the worst that could happen? It's not like a plane's gonna fall out of the sky - Exhibit A.
Yeah that's gross. Btw, Amazon does sell some cheaper ebook readers on the understanding that they will show ads. Was that the case here?
It was fairly straightforward to replace the ad images. Now it shows me cat pictures when turned off.
Kindle Voyage 1st generation, if that's relevant.
So not only did mine exit flight mode it somehow re-enabled updates and updated itself.
I just use a Kobo now.
EULAs are an entirely separate problem, though.
I'm not saying it's ok to ignore flight mode options, but neither is the expectation to completely avoid ads when buying this very version of the Kindle.
I have couple kindle paperwhites of different generations, and none of them did any unexpected update for years.
It's getting to the point where it's not even watchable. I click back to exit and maybe go back later but I have hundreds of partially watched videos I've forgotten about.
And they're paying for that. Well, more like, and YOU'RE paying for that.
YouTube has YouTube Red so you can kill ads. Seems like either way you're going to pay.
It makes it a bit more convenient to switch between my Roku/Switch/PC when I can push a button on the remote to have the devices ping the TV themselves.
I do prefer a dumb TV, but it doesn't have to be completely brainless.
Edit- my bad, it was a Hitachi. The vizio tv I have was purchased last year. However both are dumb, they have no internet capabilities at all
Which is great news - they are fantastic displays, they last forever, and they behave just like a very big computer monitor.
NEC commercial displays (P461, for instance) are not expensive. I highly recommend you look into it.
They do, but from what I understand you'll pay more for such panels. As I understand it they're intended for commercial use.
That actually sounds like the dream.
Plan on getting one with a stick PC.
The UI seems to gotten much more sluggish over the last year or two. I have a 500 Mbps internet connection, but speed tests in the TV's browser measure only 40 Mbps (on Wi-Fi or Ethernet). The TV's apps load images and data as if I'm on a 2G connection.
The Amazon and YouTube apps hang if I turn the TV off and try to resume playback later. I have to switch to two other apps and then back to Amazon to force the app to crash. Then I can launch it again. And sometimes the only way to exit the Netflix app is to power cycle the TV.
I used to joke with my brother and turn his TV on/off, he went crazy thinking the TV is broke.
Type in "4k -smart" without the quotes in the search box. Use the filters on the left to narrow it down to TVs (like selecting what size you want).
In general, my last like, 5 Samsung products have been disappointing, mostly due to software, or lack there of.
I have never seen a single ad or anything remotely like it. The only thing is the remote has dedicated buttons for Amazon something and Rakuten (both not available in my country) and Netflix.
https://gist.github.com/peteryates/b44b70d19ccd52f62d66cdd4b...
Or somebody will invent a small short-range backhaul-less 5G spoof microcell you can put next to the TV that will confuse the TV's modem into connecting to nothing.
Or just wrap the TV in a Faraday cage. But keeping the screen visible might make that tricky.
There's always been rumours that some Intel vPro CPUs have modems (and entire secondary CPUs..) built in to the chip itself.
Atom x3/x5/x7 processors have a modem in the CPU package.
I imagine disabling the modem without breaking the TV would be impossible.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Star_Trek_materials#Tr...