WiFi in iOS 11 keeps turning on

I'm sure Lawrence appreciates you want him to get the points. And I'm not speaking for him, but most of us don't hang around trying to help people for the points. We do it out of the goodness of our wee wittle hearts!

Thanks; I appreciate the thought, but points are not my primary reason for being here. I’ve maxed out the benefits of accumulated points.

When my bridge partner and I reached Life Master we both said; “how great! Now we can just play for fun.”

rbrylawski wrote:

Bridge is, IMHO, the mental equivalent of Golf.

I was forced to learn it as a child so that I could partner with my brother or uncle in games with my parents. The games tended to last well into the wee hours. I didn't inherit the family gift for cards. It was not pleasant.

She served it at the Church lunches, booze and religion go together so well. 🙂 She was never wrong, about anything, anytime, any place. Or so she told me. She stepped up for my Mother and brought me up, so I had plenty of time to observe her ways, she did in fact make me what I am in the most part, but it is too late to punish her for that.

Edith:

rbrylawski wrote:

Bridge is, IMHO, the mental equivalent of Golf.

A lot of bridge players do both. And most agree with that sentiment. I don't play goif, however. I tried and found it too stressful.

Golf courses are beautiful they said. Buy a set of clubs. Buy some spiky shoes. Buy some balls. Buy some tees. You'll love the great outdoors. So I did. Most frigging frustrating, blasted game EVER. The golf clubs, shoes, balls and tees were donated to a charity!

Is that pop-up with the new 11.2.1? I haven't seen it.

Work. Regardless of what I turn the wifi on and off for, it should really stay off until I turn it back on. No settings should change periodically without user input. What research or statistical data would indicate that users would want something besides "when I hit the wifi, I expect wifi to be off until I turn it on"? If that's not the reason why it was changed, what is the benefit to user interaction or security? I can't see any. If people want to connect to wifi y instead of wifi x in same location, that makes sense to have to involve settings, but not a quick off UFN.

What if an apple user had unlimited data on their phones and iPads but limited data on their home wifi, and the phones while updating or running vids or etc, switched to wifi unbeknownst to the user? That could cause major overage fees. Just doesn't make sense from where I'm at. I would love to see the other side to this argument, what is the benefit?

Also, when Im just outside my home network, say outside playing with kids, the connections for games and streaming and everything will go in and out depending on distance. When I want a reliable stream of uninterrupted data I would switch wifi off.

My argument is that I should be able to shut it off with the slide menu without going into settings, and it stay off, like with previous os builds. Anything else is unnecessary awkward and a potential security issue.

Amakahi wrote:

Also, when Im just outside my home network, say outside playing with kids, the connections for games and streaming and everything will go in and out depending on distance. When I want a reliable stream of uninterrupted data I would switch wifi off.

About Wi-Fi Assist - Apple Support

Amakahi wrote:

My argument is that I should be able to shut it off with the slide menu without going into settings, and it stay off, like with previous os builds. Anything else is unnecessary awkward and a potential security issue.

What did you do before the Control Center? You had to learn a new way to do things when that was introduced.

The security issue is a straw man. It is simply not the case. We get you don't like the change. And it's a perfectly legitimate preference. I don't like black licorice. But I don't pretend that it should be taken off the market as dangerous so that I can avoid ever accidentally eating a black jelly bean.

Again, you clearly haven't read the posts in this and many other threads about security. Since you're an "engineer" please explain how an open Wifi radio is a security risk. Warning, before you do and make yourself look like an uninformed or not particularly good engineer, I suggest you take the time to read through this thread. Once you've done that, come back and tell us how it's a security threat won't you?

deggie wrote:

Any color other than black licorice is not licorice.

Ahem. Them's is fighting words good buddy! I love Red Licorice and I will believe I'm eating Licorice, even if'n you say I'm not! LOL

I suppose in some circumstances...I don't have the watch so I can't speak to that..but it doesn't make sense to me to go to a feature that takes active connectivity on-off control away from the user and make it passive...Previous versions had auto-connect to trusted networks...Just doesn't seem like a security-conscious change, it seems to be a change for convenience that sacrifices security.

deggie wrote:

Any color other than black licorice is not licorice.

Indeed. But, as it is used differently in the vernacular, I specified.

Some government agency released a warning around Halloween this year that too much licorice was, in fact, dangerous. It was very odd. Kids will go for the Reeses over the licorice every time.