to some malicious extension or application available for the iPhone. My whole point is that it is possible to protect against clueless users installing a malicious app if you have a closed centrally managed app store. The GP post claimed that the only protection was user education.
Oh, and Chrome is built on top of WebKit also, genius.
your original post claimed that these types of security holes were inevitable, the only way to combat them is with informed and careful users.
I countered that another way to counter them (even with uninformed and un-careful users) is to place all your users in a padded room which locks from the outside.
Just stupid and tone-deaf. The primary reason I use a Mac is because I debug deeply technical issues all day and when I come home I just want something that works and that I don't have to de-virus every week. I encourage all my friends and family to buy Macs because I'm the "one guy" they know who can fix up their PC and I got sick of doing it. It is obnoxious to reduce Mac-owners down to brand-fucking elitists--it's also just untrue.
> I challenge you to remove the little Apple logo from your box(es) to prove that it's not display of that logo is unimportant to you.
Obviously I'm not going to do this because (a) I don't care about your opinion of me, (b) I suspect I know far more about computers than you do--so I don't need to prove my geek-cred, (c) I don't care whether or not you *exist* at all, and (d) the logos on Apple products are nicely embossed or otherwise difficult to remove. Maybe you are used to cheap little stickers or something.
in my opinion. Try to play chicken with Steve Jobs and see what happens. He locked the iPhone out of the entire Verizon market in the US (which is huge) because he felt passionately that Apple's value proposition includes controlling the user experience.
That said, though, I think Apple is flexible on some of the App Store policies (like competing with core functionality apps)--they just aren't flexible on allowing the user experience & perception of an iPhone to include malware/viruses/unreliable junk apps. There's a way to split this hair in a way that makes everyone happy.
it doesn't match up with reality. Apple has lots of hardware patents as well--they are a hardware company, btw--and Nokia wanted access to those as well.
> It stands to reason that Nokia's portfolio is more valuable.
Now we all know that you are completely full of shit.
I don't understand your point...Nokia has the right to demand money for use of their patents (as part of a standard) but Apple is entitled to nothing wrt their patents on unrelated technologies?
Think honestly whose side you would be on if the situation was reversed. Suppose as a condition for implementing a standard over which Apple held some patents (I don't know, HTML5 video codecs) then Nokia was required to give Apple free access to their entire patent portfolio.
You also can't load code onto your microwave
on
iPhone 4 News Roundup
·
· Score: -1, Troll
Does that bother you? If you think of the iPhone as an appliance and not a computer, then it makes perfect sense.
Nokia participated in a consortium to create the GSM standard, including (as often is the case in these kinds of standards) utilizing several Nokia patented technologies in the standard. Usually the companies which contribute such technologies agree to license such patents in a RAND (reasonable and non-discriminatory) way towards anyone who wants to implement the standards. Which means (roughly) that Qualcomm pays the same amount as Apple.
Nokia, however, decided that instead they were going to insist, as a condition of licensing the technologies necessary for implementing the GSM standard, that they be granted access to all of Apple's patents covering things like the iPhone. Basically, they could turn around and make a complete iPhone clone--and that was the "cost of admission" for building any kind of phone. This is not RAND because obviously the value of the Apple francise is a bit higher than any number of other companies that Nokia adopted such terms with. It would have been reasonable for Nokia to insist on cross-licensing for any technologies from Apple related to GSM, but where's the justification in them getting free access to Apple's patents on iPhone hardware design, for example.
This is Rambus-level behavior from Nokia--and they are going to get smacked down for it.
...that Apple actually knows what they are doing, considering that they literally cannot manufacture iDevices fast enough for people who are willing to buy them sight unseen.
I'm sure Steve Jobs is weeping that he doesn't get your business, but making you happy means he probably has to lose 10 other customers because he would have to turn the iPhone into a Mad-Max-like wasteland of viruses, spamware, and flaky-crashing apps.
Windows 7 might be awesome, I haven't really tried it yet. How many fucking failed Windows versions do I have to go through before I earn (in your eyes) moral authority to use Mac OS? Once I'm using OSX, do I have to try out each new version of Windows to see if it still has 8 trillion viruses and pop-ups and "Please insert floppy in drive A:" bullshit?
I still have to use Windows on my work laptop, and one in three times when I close the lid it won't wake back up when I reopen the lid later. I've had that same problem off and on across many PC brands and versions of Windows for the last ten years. That kind of shit wouldn't fly on Mac--because you and I know that the first time it happened to Steve Jobs he would murder someone.
I just tried, 17 in a row opens and closes on my MacBook and it happily wakes up every fucking time. Guess what? no pop-ups either.
So you picked Apple as an alternative to Linux and that makes you fucking l33t, but people who picked it as an alternative to Windows are n00bs and everyone else is a shallow brand-fucking 'Mactard'.
are the reason that I have all manner of friends and relatives asking me how to make their computer start behaving nicely.
I've never had that problem from anyone with an iPhone...and I rarely have that problem from users of a Mac...I wonder why that is?
People with iPhone's are happy, people with Mac's are happy. People with PCs and shitphones are often unhappy.
I guess freedom is about maximizing the people who are unhappy? really? that's the only solution here?
How about people who want an appliance that just works simply and keeps them from shooting themselves in the foot should buy from Apple and power users should get PCs running slackware and an Android phone. Then everyone's happy, right? So why are you so miserable?
Apple is happy with web apps--they currently have probably the most standards compliant web browser on any mobile device--it does better on ACID3 than the version of Firefox I'm using right now.
When the iPhone was released, web apps were the path that Apple was pushing for 3rd party apps--and at the time Slashdot was all atwitter that they wouldn't allow 3rd parties to write native apps. I guess you were arguing at the time for Apples side?
Slashdot Mirror
to some malicious extension or application available for the iPhone. My whole point is that it is possible to protect against clueless users installing a malicious app if you have a closed centrally managed app store. The GP post claimed that the only protection was user education.
Oh, and Chrome is built on top of WebKit also, genius.
your original post claimed that these types of security holes were inevitable, the only way to combat them is with informed and careful users.
I countered that another way to counter them (even with uninformed and un-careful users) is to place all your users in a padded room which locks from the outside.
Oh. I guess your point is that iPhone users are smarter than everyone else. My mistake.
> The primary purpose of buying a Mac is elitism
Just stupid and tone-deaf. The primary reason I use a Mac is because I debug deeply technical issues all day and when I come home I just want something that works and that I don't have to de-virus every week. I encourage all my friends and family to buy Macs because I'm the "one guy" they know who can fix up their PC and I got sick of doing it. It is obnoxious to reduce Mac-owners down to brand-fucking elitists--it's also just untrue.
> I challenge you to remove the little Apple logo from your box(es) to prove that it's not display of that logo is unimportant to you.
Obviously I'm not going to do this because (a) I don't care about your opinion of me, (b) I suspect I know far more about computers than you do--so I don't need to prove my geek-cred, (c) I don't care whether or not you *exist* at all, and (d) the logos on Apple products are nicely embossed or otherwise difficult to remove. Maybe you are used to cheap little stickers or something.
in my opinion. Try to play chicken with Steve Jobs and see what happens. He locked the iPhone out of the entire Verizon market in the US (which is huge) because he felt passionately that Apple's value proposition includes controlling the user experience.
That said, though, I think Apple is flexible on some of the App Store policies (like competing with core functionality apps)--they just aren't flexible on allowing the user experience & perception of an iPhone to include malware/viruses/unreliable junk apps. There's a way to split this hair in a way that makes everyone happy.
it doesn't match up with reality. Apple has lots of hardware patents as well--they are a hardware company, btw--and Nokia wanted access to those as well.
> It stands to reason that Nokia's portfolio is more valuable.
Now we all know that you are completely full of shit.
...then they should be able to enforce them.
I don't understand your point...Nokia has the right to demand money for use of their patents (as part of a standard) but Apple is entitled to nothing wrt their patents on unrelated technologies?
Think honestly whose side you would be on if the situation was reversed. Suppose as a condition for implementing a standard over which Apple held some patents (I don't know, HTML5 video codecs) then Nokia was required to give Apple free access to their entire patent portfolio.
Does that bother you? If you think of the iPhone as an appliance and not a computer, then it makes perfect sense.
Nokia participated in a consortium to create the GSM standard, including (as often is the case in these kinds of standards) utilizing several Nokia patented technologies in the standard. Usually the companies which contribute such technologies agree to license such patents in a RAND (reasonable and non-discriminatory) way towards anyone who wants to implement the standards. Which means (roughly) that Qualcomm pays the same amount as Apple.
Nokia, however, decided that instead they were going to insist, as a condition of licensing the technologies necessary for implementing the GSM standard, that they be granted access to all of Apple's patents covering things like the iPhone. Basically, they could turn around and make a complete iPhone clone--and that was the "cost of admission" for building any kind of phone. This is not RAND because obviously the value of the Apple francise is a bit higher than any number of other companies that Nokia adopted such terms with. It would have been reasonable for Nokia to insist on cross-licensing for any technologies from Apple related to GSM, but where's the justification in them getting free access to Apple's patents on iPhone hardware design, for example.
This is Rambus-level behavior from Nokia--and they are going to get smacked down for it.
Good lord...you are an idiot. Read a book or something.
Did Chrome crash while you were typing your reply?
Go ahead...I'll wait.
...that Apple actually knows what they are doing, considering that they literally cannot manufacture iDevices fast enough for people who are willing to buy them sight unseen.
You've been able to develop and push your own custom enterprise apps without apple store restrictions for years.
Haven't you heard? There's 47 Android devices to every iPhone anyway, and they all like it better because it has flawless flash support and porn.
I'm sure Steve Jobs is weeping that he doesn't get your business, but making you happy means he probably has to lose 10 other customers because he would have to turn the iPhone into a Mad-Max-like wasteland of viruses, spamware, and flaky-crashing apps.
Have fun with your HTC.
Makes the Cray-1 look pretty good if you are sitting in 1979.
Then you are grandfathered in. Stop whining.
Windows 7 might be awesome, I haven't really tried it yet. How many fucking failed Windows versions do I have to go through before I earn (in your eyes) moral authority to use Mac OS? Once I'm using OSX, do I have to try out each new version of Windows to see if it still has 8 trillion viruses and pop-ups and "Please insert floppy in drive A:" bullshit?
I still have to use Windows on my work laptop, and one in three times when I close the lid it won't wake back up when I reopen the lid later. I've had that same problem off and on across many PC brands and versions of Windows for the last ten years. That kind of shit wouldn't fly on Mac--because you and I know that the first time it happened to Steve Jobs he would murder someone.
I just tried, 17 in a row opens and closes on my MacBook and it happily wakes up every fucking time. Guess what? no pop-ups either.
So you picked Apple as an alternative to Linux and that makes you fucking l33t, but people who picked it as an alternative to Windows are n00bs and everyone else is a shallow brand-fucking 'Mactard'.
are the reason that I have all manner of friends and relatives asking me how to make their computer start behaving nicely.
I've never had that problem from anyone with an iPhone...and I rarely have that problem from users of a Mac...I wonder why that is?
People with iPhone's are happy, people with Mac's are happy. People with PCs and shitphones are often unhappy.
I guess freedom is about maximizing the people who are unhappy? really? that's the only solution here?
How about people who want an appliance that just works simply and keeps them from shooting themselves in the foot should buy from Apple and power users should get PCs running slackware and an Android phone. Then everyone's happy, right? So why are you so miserable?
IMHO
Are you pissed off about that? it's a cell phone. You can run whatever you want on your Mac or PC at home.
Apple is happy with web apps--they currently have probably the most standards compliant web browser on any mobile device--it does better on ACID3 than the version of Firefox I'm using right now.
When the iPhone was released, web apps were the path that Apple was pushing for 3rd party apps--and at the time Slashdot was all atwitter that they wouldn't allow 3rd parties to write native apps. I guess you were arguing at the time for Apples side?
1. Apple's computers are available for anyone to develop apps on without paying a fee.
2. Apple's phones support HTML5, which anyone can write Flash-equivalent apps for without paying a fee.