Eric Stevens
On Mon, 14 Jul 2014 21:53:49 -0400, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

nospam
In article <lq1tgl01q83@news3.newsguy.com>, PeterN <peter.newnospam@verizon.net>wrote:

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

nospam
the only risk is for theft.

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

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

nospam
all of them.

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

you really have no clue, do you?

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

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

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

nospam
they're also smaller and easier to hide.

PeterN
And lose.

nospam
no.

Eric Stevens
Haw. Who believes that?