A Nokia 3310 would be a 2G GSM phone. Both GSM carriers in the US have turned off 2G support.
If you wanted, there is nothing stopping you from using an iPhone 3G released in 2008. In fact, I have a first gen iPad. You can still download older versions of Netflix, Hulu, Spotify etc and they still work.
Seeing that you can still buy standard Bluetooth headphones from anywhere and an adapter comes in the box. There is nothing stopping you from using third party headphones.
The internal filesystem layout used by photos is not intended to be manually browsed, it is non-trivial and undocumented. I might be able to recover the original jpg files, but any metadata such as organisation structure, tags, albums is locked up in proprietary closed formats. They offer an export function which gets you the jpgs, but not much else.
> there is nothing stopping you from using an iPhone 3G released in 2008
Security for one. Apple and Google have both built an extremely complex phone OS that needs constant patching to even remain "reasonably secure".
> you can still buy standard Bluetooth headphones
My concern is longevity, simplicity and sound quality. I would not want to use bluetooth.
What “tags”? The photos app doesn’t support tagging.
Exactly what exploits do you expect to have on an iPhone 3G? Keyloggers? Viruses? Data exfiltration apps?
An exploit means that someone can remotely gain permanent control over your iPhone, including the ability to record conversations and/or initiate activity on your behalf. iOS exploits have been possible via SMS/MMS and WiFi, so even turning off Web and Email won't make it secure.
This is a major inconvenience for me since my photo library is spread around multiple SSDs and NAS. In Lightroom, I just tell it where different photos are.
In Photos App, if you want your photos to sync to iCloud, you need to copy them. This increases size of your Photos Library file. You can choose to Optimize storage but then you have one point of failure (iCloud).
Right now, I use rsync to backup my photos to onsite NAS. And then I use Google Drive and iCloud for offsite backup. Google Drive works with photos where ever they are, SSD, NAS, etc. But iDrive needs all photos in Photos app to sync.
BTW iDrive and Google Drive are not true backup solutions, so be careful if that is your only “backup” solution.
Last time I checked, it was a bundle, which is just a folder, and you can browse it easily by right clicking and picking Show Package Contents. Both originals and modified images are readily available, and Photos stores some metadata (even tags) straight in the EXIF part.
I was talking about the OSX "photos app" - an iPhone typically won't have enough storage to hold all photos at once, so doesn't seem like the best way to transfer photos away from iCloud.
What does the iPhone not having space to store all of your photos have to do with using iCloud?
Because iCloud is a big part of their lock-in strategy. The issue is not about transferring a few photos adhoc from a phone. It is about having potentially terabytes of family movies and photos stored and organised on iCloud. Like I said, there is a financial incentive for them to make it difficult for people to move away. There is no easy way to transfer everything off, including all metadata.
It's pretty well supported?
Ive personally used the export / archive features of iCloud when i went from iOS to android. the longest part was waiting for the pics / vids to download from icloud and upload to google drive.
I even exported stuff out of google's ecosystem and back into iCloud when I moved back. This was a month or two ago.
I know many many years ago I had issues with iCloud, but that was before they fixed / improved their web interface (and everything else).
Android phones are indeed as bad or worse than Apple with regard to lifespan, but this was a trend that Apple started. A Nokia 3310 purchased in 2000 would still work fine today. Apple would even like to see something as simple and universal as a headphone jack disappear in order to regularly sell new headphones (!)