I don't have an iPhone, but according to the Apple FAQ:
How does the Maps location based service (LBS) work?
LBS provides your approximate location using information based on your proximity to known cellular network towers and Wi-Fi networks (when on and available). The more accurate the available information, the smaller the circle identifying your position on the map. The feature is not available in all areas. Known Wi-Fi networks are predominantly in urban areas. In order to provide your location, data is collected in a form that does not personally identify you. If you do not want such data collected, do not enable the feature. Not enabling the feature will not impact the functionality of your iPhone.
I'm assuming you have cell towers near you. Sure, when driving you'll need more accurate information than the LBS provides. But on foot, a map of the surrounding area should be good enough for most.
I took the introduction of the "location approximation" feature within the iPhone maps application to be an indication that Apple are thinking the same way as yourself. I think most people can live with the functionality as it is. I understand that GPS uses more battery power and I'd guess most of us already have it in our cars. I'd be surprised if GPS was in the next revision.
I like my Mac.
That is all.
Unfortunately, most of my colleagues are aware that my home PC is an iMac. This means that I have now lost count of the number of people who have walked up to my desk and said "the iPhone is a bit shit" or "the Macbook Air is far too expensive - you'd be better off with a Dell". I don't own either product. I'm not in the market for a laptop and or a new phone.
Where does this reverse-evangelism come from?
Most Mac users accept that each new OS X release will require more RAM to run than the last. But each new release adds some highly visible and heavily promoted features - Expose, Dashboard, Spotlight, Time Machine etc...
Vista also adds new features, but Microsoft haven't done enough to convince the user-base that these features justify the increased system requirements. Worse still, a lot of users believe that the increased system requirements are down to evil DRM and other shenanigans.
Like it or not, Apple's 'crowd-pleasing' development and marketing works wonders on the average Mac user. Microsoft could learn a lot from Apple in that regard.
Usmanov is also dogged by the widespread belief in Uzbekistan that he was guilty of a particularly atrocious rape, which was covered up and the victim and others in the know disappeared. The sad thing is that this is not particularly remarkable. Rape by the powerful is an everyday hazard in Uzbekistan, again as outlined in Murder in Samarkand page 120. If anyone has more detail on the specific case involving Usmanov please add a comment.
Don't want to side with the bad guy, but...
The section above leaves me feeling very uncomfortable. If someone made this kind of unsubstantiated allegation towards me, I would want it removed.
'Widespread belief' is very difficult to quantify and in any event, is certainly not proof of guilt.
I say "Hooray Apple!" on this one.
I don't want your clunky Carbon application running on my shiny new 64bit processor... I'm a consumer, not a developer.
Cocoa is what the Apple loving masses want.
Again, I think the consistency that the author was talking about can be seen clearly in the OSX "traffic lights" and their behaviour.
I can't think of a single application that does not have these (even WOW...)
Now look at the Vista screenshot - Office looks completely different from the OS itself. Only the red X function appears to highlight the active window. Not as distinctive as the OSX method.
Still, not the end of he world either...
I'd have to re-read the article, but I thought he was refering to the "traffic lights" in the top left...
I thought the point the author was trying to make was that the Vista equivalent is not as clearly identifiable and that the eye is drawn to the bright back button on the inactive window in the example screenshot.
Still, he's a Mac user - so his familiarity with the OSX is understandable.
Does the exploit actually work as stated?
Forget the politics and point scoring - has anybody actually made this exploit work?
That's important, right?
Slashdot Mirror
Two to four hours of 3G on this bad boy before the battery dies?
I hope the next iPhone is nothing like the Qtek 9000...
I don't have an iPhone, but according to the Apple FAQ:
How does the Maps location based service (LBS) work?
LBS provides your approximate location using information based on your proximity to known cellular network towers and Wi-Fi networks (when on and available). The more accurate the available information, the smaller the circle identifying your position on the map. The feature is not available in all areas. Known Wi-Fi networks are predominantly in urban areas. In order to provide your location, data is collected in a form that does not personally identify you. If you do not want such data collected, do not enable the feature. Not enabling the feature will not impact the functionality of your iPhone.
I'm assuming you have cell towers near you. Sure, when driving you'll need more accurate information than the LBS provides. But on foot, a map of the surrounding area should be good enough for most.
I took the introduction of the "location approximation" feature within the iPhone maps application to be an indication that Apple are thinking the same way as yourself. I think most people can live with the functionality as it is. I understand that GPS uses more battery power and I'd guess most of us already have it in our cars.
I'd be surprised if GPS was in the next revision.
I like my Mac.
That is all.
Unfortunately, most of my colleagues are aware that my home PC is an iMac. This means that I have now lost count of the number of people who have walked up to my desk and said "the iPhone is a bit shit" or "the Macbook Air is far too expensive - you'd be better off with a Dell". I don't own either product. I'm not in the market for a laptop and or a new phone.
Where does this reverse-evangelism come from?
Most Mac users accept that each new OS X release will require more RAM to run than the last. But each new release adds some highly visible and heavily promoted features - Expose, Dashboard, Spotlight, Time Machine etc...
Vista also adds new features, but Microsoft haven't done enough to convince the user-base that these features justify the increased system requirements. Worse still, a lot of users believe that the increased system requirements are down to evil DRM and other shenanigans.
Like it or not, Apple's 'crowd-pleasing' development and marketing works wonders on the average Mac user. Microsoft could learn a lot from Apple in that regard.
Usmanov is also dogged by the widespread belief in Uzbekistan that he was guilty of a particularly atrocious rape, which was covered up and the victim and others in the know disappeared. The sad thing is that this is not particularly remarkable. Rape by the powerful is an everyday hazard in Uzbekistan, again as outlined in Murder in Samarkand page 120. If anyone has more detail on the specific case involving Usmanov please add a comment.
Don't want to side with the bad guy, but...
The section above leaves me feeling very uncomfortable. If someone made this kind of unsubstantiated allegation towards me, I would want it removed.
'Widespread belief' is very difficult to quantify and in any event, is certainly not proof of guilt.
Homophobes are usually closet bisexuals.
No, no, no. A homophobe is a specific type of homonym - a word that is pronounced the same as another word but differs in meaning.
Didn't they teach you anything in school?
I say "Hooray Apple!" on this one. I don't want your clunky Carbon application running on my shiny new 64bit processor... I'm a consumer, not a developer. Cocoa is what the Apple loving masses want.
Wow, where did you buy your copy of OSX?
I can't find one anywhere for an Intel platform. It's not pirated is it?
Again, I think the consistency that the author was talking about can be seen clearly in the OSX "traffic lights" and their behaviour. I can't think of a single application that does not have these (even WOW...) Now look at the Vista screenshot - Office looks completely different from the OS itself. Only the red X function appears to highlight the active window. Not as distinctive as the OSX method. Still, not the end of he world either...
I'd have to re-read the article, but I thought he was refering to the "traffic lights" in the top left... I thought the point the author was trying to make was that the Vista equivalent is not as clearly identifiable and that the eye is drawn to the bright back button on the inactive window in the example screenshot. Still, he's a Mac user - so his familiarity with the OSX is understandable.
Does the exploit actually work as stated? Forget the politics and point scoring - has anybody actually made this exploit work? That's important, right?