ALL OSES, be they Windows, Linux, or OSX are frankly some of the most complex software platforms EVER created by man, and since man is fallible there WILL be bugs and if there are enough users to make it worth the trouble it WILL be exploited.
iOS still has a significant marketshare, yet an insignificant number of security breaches.
Sure, some of this could be (I say could because there isn't much evidence backing this) because iOS is a more locked down platform. But by your own thesis this platform should have plenty of security problems.
Re:Smart TV? Help me understand...
on
Boxee Sold To Samsung
·
· Score: 4, Informative
I'm in the market for a new TV. Since I'm very, very old, I'm upgrading from a 25-year-old CRT TV, and I don't think I care much about 4K. I'm prone to VR sickness, so I don't want 3D, either.
I realize that I probably can't count on my next TV lasting 25 years. But why on Earth would I want my media box built into my television, so that following the curve of technological advancement means pitching the entire huge TV into the waste stream?
Because you are not the government. Government needs to be handled differently than other parties that you interact with. Government provides power, which corrupts. While there may not be an expectation of privacy between our fellow citizens, there certainly is with our relationship to our government.
Right. So let me get this straight. We want the government to ship packages but: - They can't know who the package is from. - That can't know who it is going to. - And they certainly can't have any database tracking the package.
The postal service might as well take your package, throw it in a pit, and set it on fire. And people wonder why the government is so inefficient.
(And before the "The government shouldn't be handling the mail" argument, if only there were private services you could use instead. Hm. I'm sure those services wouldn't possibly keep your shipments in a database either though, right?)
I'm confused on why there would be any expectation this is private to begin with. I could walk around my neighborhood and build my own database based off of the boxes on everyone's porch. Every mail clerk who touches the box is going to see the info. There has to be a database somewhere to actually track the shipment. It's like me complaining that the color of my car isn't private information.
If you think this information has ever been private you're doing it wrong.
AirPlay is a marketing name for 3 different protocols: AirTunes (RTSP-based music streaming protocol), AirPlay (video files served up over HTTP) and AirPlay Mirroring.
Guess which use case is the most popular.
So it would be the open source AirTunes, not an open source AirPlay. Title is still wrong.
Assuming TSMC can really start churning high millions of chips on a brand new 20nm process reliably. Seems unlikely considering how often they have had teething problems with new processes in the past.
According to the article, they've been doing trial runs for a few years. It's not unthinkable that they've worked out the teething issues during that time.
UEFI serves one and only one purpose. It makes it 'easier' to just continue using Windows and more difficult to use any other system.
Linux doesn't need UEFI. Nobody needs UEFI.
Stopped shilling lipstick on a pig.
UEFI and secure boot are not the same thing.
I'm sitting at an EFI Mac right now, and have owned a UEFI machine. Neither had secure boot or needed signed copies of an OS. Both the Mac and the Windows box will boot any unsigned OS you throw at it.
Um, not really, Apple needs Samsung, Samsung doesn't need apple. Samsung is one few companies that can keep the demand apple has for chips in its phones. Going from company size, Samsung is much larger and worth a lot more considering they make so many products where as Apple 95-98% of their profits are from 2 product's
TSMC plans to start mass-producing the chips early next year using advanced '20-nanometer' technology, which makes the chips potentially smaller and more energy-efficient.
XCODE, unless it's meaning changed since I last checked, is not an acronym. It's just Xcode.
As far as Xcode as a skill? Xcode is just another code editor. It has a few fancy features, but nothing that's that dramatically different. Submitter probably means learning either iOS or Mac development (and probably learning Obj-C.) All of these things could be valuable skills.
But let's be specific. Learning Dreamweaver and learning HTML5 aren't the same thing either.
You might get the same ios number as the latest phone, but it's hardly the same ios, it'll be lacking half of the good new features.
Again, doesn't matter in the context of being a developer. Even if it's lacking half the user facing features, it still gets the new APIs, and you can write software against the new APIs that still work on the device.
Why does it matter, as an app developer? If your program runs without a force close and doesn't use any specific features to an Android version, your app shouldn't care if it is running on the latest code.
But isn't using new features specific to new Android versions the point? If it isn't, Google should just stop including new APIs in new versions of Android, right?
Android 4.0 comes with a bunch of API advances but you can't effectively use them while you're supporting 2.3. Not without greatly increased overhead.
If you're coding for the iPhone, you deal with iPhone 5 screen resolution and iPhone 4/4S. That's 2 screen resolutions.
Try coding for Android, while having fun doing it;)
I actually have a feeling the screen resolution thing isn't going to hold. Apple is going to go with multiple screens eventually.
I program part time for Android, and the screen resolution thing isn't actually what bothers me on Android. A lot of other things do bother me and make iOS still my favorite platform. But both platforms have very effective tools for dealing with screen size differences (Android more in practice, and iOS more in theory at this point.)
It's the same with targeting Android 4.0.x as the baseline. You will hit 75% of the Android market. There are some folks who just use their phone to talk and text... Android 2.2.x will do that until their phones break so they will not upgrade until they have to. Folks need to stop whining about fragmentation and target the majority because most of those "good enough" phones with 2.2.x on them will just be around... it's not like they can be revoked or have a newer version that's crippled. It is what it is.
So if Google announced a major new version tomorrow how long would it be before I could exclusively target that version? Talking about 4.0 is good and all, but 4.0 is two years old. 2.3 is three years old. It's not exactly a huge achievement that you can target 4.0, especially if that means if Google released a major update tomorrow it would take two years to be able to realistically target that version.
That's Apple's point. They're saying on iOS you can make that transition in three months, not two years.
But that wasn't the point of the graphic. The graphic was created by Apple to tell developers that they should target the newest version of iOS exclusively, if possible.
Now imagine making that argument on Android. Anyone suggesting that an Android developer should seriously target 4.2 exclusively would be laughed out of the room.
This article is missing the point. It was a dig at Android for hurting developers, not necessarily users.
Wake me when C# programs run on anything other than Windows. GP is absolutely correct---if you actually try to use Mono for anything serious, you realize how quickly it starts to suck.
I can't run a program written in C++ on every platform. Doesn't make it not a standard.
I think that a $200 tablet for web browsing, email, and remote desktop would be pretty useful despite the limited app store. Maybe it's time to send my Touchpad to ebay and try one of these out...
Except the $200 price only applies if you are a school buying for your students... An individual can't get that price.
Sure, Apple getting a version of a Xeon chip that's predecessor isn't available either would be highly unusual. That would be Apple skipping 2 generations ahead, not a single generation, which has never happened.
Make the field optional. In addition to male and female, add both and neither. Also, review the reason you even keep that information. It may not be necessary at all.
Ehhhhh... That's hardly going to fix the problem.
Think about a medical database. You might need to know gender to know how to address the person or identity them (which would probably be the gender they currently are.) But then you need to know their birth gender for medical reasons. That part is definitely not optional, but the first record might be. Maybe.
It gets more complicated when you are reconciling data. If someone who identified as male is suddenly applying for a lot of things as female, is that fraud? What do you do if they call to access records and info no longer matches? What about tracing existing information?
So it's probably not enough to simply make the field optional, and it's probably also not enough to only have one field.
Every desktop, laptop, tablet, smartphone, and personal music player currently in my household is an Apple product, but until we get this sorted out, I'm not buying any more of their gear. And I'm recommending that family and friends do the same.
If that's your attitude, it's time to unplug your internet and cancel your cell phone contract. I'm not excusing Apple, but if you're going to hold every company to the same degree of accountability, why are you stopping at Apple?
I'm betting this is the only way to get MS to fix the problem in a timely fashion. If it's in the wild, they HAVE to fix it, and fast. Guys had to do this with Apple, as well, because they never fixed any bugs unless absolutely forced to.
So why not report it, wait two weeks, and then disclose it publicly?
This entire conversation assumes reporting it to the vendor and disclosing it publicly are mutually exclusive. Report to the vendor, and give them a deadline as to when you'll disclose it. If they don't patch by the deadline, it gets disclosed. Thus they have to patch it quickly.
Slashdot Mirror
ALL OSES, be they Windows, Linux, or OSX are frankly some of the most complex software platforms EVER created by man, and since man is fallible there WILL be bugs and if there are enough users to make it worth the trouble it WILL be exploited.
iOS still has a significant marketshare, yet an insignificant number of security breaches.
Sure, some of this could be (I say could because there isn't much evidence backing this) because iOS is a more locked down platform. But by your own thesis this platform should have plenty of security problems.
I'm in the market for a new TV. Since I'm very, very old, I'm upgrading from a 25-year-old CRT TV, and I don't think I care much about 4K. I'm prone to VR sickness, so I don't want 3D, either.
I realize that I probably can't count on my next TV lasting 25 years. But why on Earth would I want my media box built into my television, so that following the curve of technological advancement means pitching the entire huge TV into the waste stream?
Samsung TV's have upgradable motherboards so you can upgrade the hardware that drives the smart tv functions independently of the rest of the box.
http://www.samsung.com/au/consumer/tv-audio-video/television/accessories/SEK-1000/XY?subsubtype=accessories
I'm not a big Samsung fan, but that's your answer.
Because you are not the government. Government needs to be handled differently than other parties that you interact with. Government provides power, which corrupts. While there may not be an expectation of privacy between our fellow citizens, there certainly is with our relationship to our government.
Right. So let me get this straight. We want the government to ship packages but:
- They can't know who the package is from.
- That can't know who it is going to.
- And they certainly can't have any database tracking the package.
The postal service might as well take your package, throw it in a pit, and set it on fire. And people wonder why the government is so inefficient.
(And before the "The government shouldn't be handling the mail" argument, if only there were private services you could use instead. Hm. I'm sure those services wouldn't possibly keep your shipments in a database either though, right?)
They know the sender and the recipient.
I'm confused on why there would be any expectation this is private to begin with. I could walk around my neighborhood and build my own database based off of the boxes on everyone's porch. Every mail clerk who touches the box is going to see the info. There has to be a database somewhere to actually track the shipment. It's like me complaining that the color of my car isn't private information.
If you think this information has ever been private you're doing it wrong.
AirPlay is a marketing name for 3 different protocols: AirTunes (RTSP-based music streaming protocol), AirPlay (video files served up over HTTP) and AirPlay Mirroring.
Guess which use case is the most popular.
So it would be the open source AirTunes, not an open source AirPlay. Title is still wrong.
Except (as far as the article implies), the government isn't aware of what's in the box.
Unless you're taking your boxes and writing all your embarrassing secrets on them this shouldn't be an issue.
Oh good! An AirPlay competitor! I wonder what video codec they used... Lemme just look through the code and...
Oh. It seems it doesn't support video at all. Not really an AirPlay competitor then...
Assuming TSMC can really start churning high millions of chips on a brand new 20nm process reliably. Seems unlikely considering how often they have had teething problems with new processes in the past.
According to the article, they've been doing trial runs for a few years. It's not unthinkable that they've worked out the teething issues during that time.
UEFI serves one and only one purpose. It makes it 'easier' to just continue using Windows and more difficult to use any other system.
Linux doesn't need UEFI. Nobody needs UEFI.
Stopped shilling lipstick on a pig.
UEFI and secure boot are not the same thing.
I'm sitting at an EFI Mac right now, and have owned a UEFI machine. Neither had secure boot or needed signed copies of an OS. Both the Mac and the Windows box will boot any unsigned OS you throw at it.
Um, not really, Apple needs Samsung, Samsung doesn't need apple. Samsung is one few companies that can keep the demand apple has for chips in its phones. Going from company size, Samsung is much larger and worth a lot more considering they make so many products where as Apple 95-98% of their profits are from 2 product's
TSMC plans to start mass-producing the chips early next year using advanced '20-nanometer' technology, which makes the chips potentially smaller and more energy-efficient.
Seems Apple doesn't need Samsung.
You realize the textbooks schools buy are probably more expensive than the iPads, right? And quicker to go out of date?
This actually seems like a money saver to me.
XCODE, unless it's meaning changed since I last checked, is not an acronym. It's just Xcode.
As far as Xcode as a skill? Xcode is just another code editor. It has a few fancy features, but nothing that's that dramatically different. Submitter probably means learning either iOS or Mac development (and probably learning Obj-C.) All of these things could be valuable skills.
But let's be specific. Learning Dreamweaver and learning HTML5 aren't the same thing either.
You might get the same ios number as the latest phone, but it's hardly the same ios, it'll be lacking half of the good new features.
Again, doesn't matter in the context of being a developer. Even if it's lacking half the user facing features, it still gets the new APIs, and you can write software against the new APIs that still work on the device.
Why does it matter, as an app developer? If your program runs without a force close and doesn't use any specific features to an Android version, your app shouldn't care if it is running on the latest code.
But isn't using new features specific to new Android versions the point? If it isn't, Google should just stop including new APIs in new versions of Android, right?
Android 4.0 comes with a bunch of API advances but you can't effectively use them while you're supporting 2.3. Not without greatly increased overhead.
If you're coding for the iPhone, you deal with iPhone 5 screen resolution and iPhone 4/4S. That's 2 screen resolutions.
Try coding for Android, while having fun doing it ;)
I actually have a feeling the screen resolution thing isn't going to hold. Apple is going to go with multiple screens eventually.
I program part time for Android, and the screen resolution thing isn't actually what bothers me on Android. A lot of other things do bother me and make iOS still my favorite platform. But both platforms have very effective tools for dealing with screen size differences (Android more in practice, and iOS more in theory at this point.)
It's the same with targeting Android 4.0.x as the baseline. You will hit 75% of the Android market. There are some folks who just use their phone to talk and text ... Android 2.2.x will do that until their phones break so they will not upgrade until they have to. Folks need to stop whining about fragmentation and target the majority because most of those "good enough" phones with 2.2.x on them will just be around ... it's not like they can be revoked or have a newer version that's crippled. It is what it is.
So if Google announced a major new version tomorrow how long would it be before I could exclusively target that version? Talking about 4.0 is good and all, but 4.0 is two years old. 2.3 is three years old. It's not exactly a huge achievement that you can target 4.0, especially if that means if Google released a major update tomorrow it would take two years to be able to realistically target that version.
That's Apple's point. They're saying on iOS you can make that transition in three months, not two years.
But that wasn't the point of the graphic. The graphic was created by Apple to tell developers that they should target the newest version of iOS exclusively, if possible.
Now imagine making that argument on Android. Anyone suggesting that an Android developer should seriously target 4.2 exclusively would be laughed out of the room.
This article is missing the point. It was a dig at Android for hurting developers, not necessarily users.
Wake me when C# programs run on anything other than Windows. GP is absolutely correct---if you actually try to use Mono for anything serious, you realize how quickly it starts to suck.
I can't run a program written in C++ on every platform. Doesn't make it not a standard.
I think that a $200 tablet for web browsing, email, and remote desktop would be pretty useful despite the limited app store. Maybe it's time to send my Touchpad to ebay and try one of these out...
Except the $200 price only applies if you are a school buying for your students... An individual can't get that price.
Sure, Apple getting a version of a Xeon chip that's predecessor isn't available either would be highly unusual. That would be Apple skipping 2 generations ahead, not a single generation, which has never happened.
First what kind of moron would wear it in the urinal?
Yeah! What kind of moron would wear it in the urinal?
And second, I have several times.
Well that answers my question...
Make the field optional. In addition to male and female, add both and neither. Also, review the reason you even keep that information. It may not be necessary at all.
Ehhhhh... That's hardly going to fix the problem.
Think about a medical database. You might need to know gender to know how to address the person or identity them (which would probably be the gender they currently are.) But then you need to know their birth gender for medical reasons. That part is definitely not optional, but the first record might be. Maybe.
It gets more complicated when you are reconciling data. If someone who identified as male is suddenly applying for a lot of things as female, is that fraud? What do you do if they call to access records and info no longer matches? What about tracing existing information?
So it's probably not enough to simply make the field optional, and it's probably also not enough to only have one field.
Haswell Xeon E5s don't ship until next year. This would be an Ivy Bridge Xeon E5, unless Apple is going to be super super special.
Every desktop, laptop, tablet, smartphone, and personal music player currently in my household is an Apple product, but until we get this sorted out, I'm not buying any more of their gear. And I'm recommending that family and friends do the same.
If that's your attitude, it's time to unplug your internet and cancel your cell phone contract. I'm not excusing Apple, but if you're going to hold every company to the same degree of accountability, why are you stopping at Apple?
I'm betting this is the only way to get MS to fix the problem in a timely fashion. If it's in the wild, they HAVE to fix it, and fast. Guys had to do this with Apple, as well, because they never fixed any bugs unless absolutely forced to.
So why not report it, wait two weeks, and then disclose it publicly?
This entire conversation assumes reporting it to the vendor and disclosing it publicly are mutually exclusive. Report to the vendor, and give them a deadline as to when you'll disclose it. If they don't patch by the deadline, it gets disclosed. Thus they have to patch it quickly.