Fingerprints are good because they replace ZERO security. Most people don't PIN lock their phones. Finger Print lock is too convenient not to use.
It is meant as a deterrent to common thieves, and works well as such. A robber isn't going to grab your phone, ask for a nice clear print, and then run home to his laser printer and latex (and you could remote wipe the device in the mean time anyway).
If its the government you're worried about...well, if they have physical access to your device they probably have you in custody and can compel you to unlock it anyway, or just use existing forensic tools and warrants to get what they want. Even then we're talking about the unlikely scenario of you being arrested and having anything more interesting on your phone than funny cat pictures.
I'm trying to imagine a "real world" scenario where TouchID is less secure than a 4 digit passcode or no security at all...and I got nothing.
Pattern lock is hardly secure considering they can see the smudge on your screen. And the NSA has said they can easily get into any Android device.
TouchID is still harder to trick than that. It's meant to deter common thieves, not James Bond. If the government has your phone they can easily compel you to unlock it or use existing forensic tools combined with warrants to your cellular provider.
T-Mobile does have a true unlimited data plan (no throttling).
I'm paying $98/month (which includes $20/month for a no-contract iPhone 5) for unlimited talk/text/data, full device insurance, and their Jump upgrade plan that allows for phone upgrades every 6 months.
I live in Reno and LTE data speed is usually between 20 - 33 Mbps download and ~8 Mbps upload.
Google PlayStore does NOT use https for actual downloads (check your own WiFi logs). So in theory, if you were connected to an insecure/public WiFi network someone could intercept your download request and replace it with a compromised download using available WiFi auditing tools.
Considering OS X has a much higher share VS. Linux, and the fact that Safari is used on hundreds of millions of iOS devices...your comment is...full of shit?
And OS X is an OS, and Chrome is a web browser (no matter how much Google pretends it isn't).
And they have nearly identical screens.
2560x1700 (Chromebook) 2560x1600 (MacBook)
So yes, it still makes far more sense to get the MacBook for $200 more to get the much faster CPU, 2x the RAM, and 4x the storage, and a legitimate OS.
When that "Core i5" is only 1.8Ghz and dual core, and when it has only 32GB of storage, and no a web browser for an OS, then yeah, it's just an overpriced NetBook.
Slashdot Mirror
It has 22 at launch with downloadable titles, and close to 200 in development...
Not true:
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT2534
No, it is still LARGELY based on OS X. It uses the same kernel
(Darwin) and many of the same API's.
Fingerprints are good because they replace ZERO security. Most people don't PIN lock their phones. Finger Print lock is too convenient not to use.
It is meant as a deterrent to common thieves, and works well as such. A robber isn't going to grab your phone, ask for a nice clear print, and then run home to his laser printer and latex (and you could remote wipe the device in the mean time anyway).
If its the government you're worried about...well, if they have physical access to your device they probably have you in custody and can compel you to unlock it anyway, or just use existing forensic tools and warrants to get what they want. Even then we're talking about the unlikely scenario of you being arrested and having anything more interesting on your phone than funny cat pictures.
I'm trying to imagine a "real world" scenario where TouchID is less secure than a 4 digit passcode or no security at all...and I got nothing.
Pattern lock is hardly secure considering they can see the smudge on your screen. And the NSA has said they can easily get into any Android device.
TouchID is still harder to trick than that. It's meant to deter common thieves, not James Bond. If the government has your phone they can easily compel you to unlock it or use existing forensic tools combined with warrants to your cellular provider.
If you're worried about that just use the old password system? The fingerprint thing isn't a requirement...
Malware that has reach end users on the App Store can be counted on your fingers. Do you *really* want to compare that to Android malware figures?
You can argue *why* that is, but reality begs to differ that App Store security is a 'delusion'.
Really? Apple didn't have to do jack shit. We're talking about 3rd party chargers and knock-off's here.
But please, make Apple the bad guy here for essentially warranting 3rd party hardware.
...but please, keep telling us how much safer and secure Linux is compared to Windows and Mac/iOS!
T-Mobile does have a true unlimited data plan (no throttling).
I'm paying $98/month (which includes $20/month for a no-contract iPhone 5) for unlimited talk/text/data, full device insurance, and their Jump upgrade plan that allows for phone upgrades every 6 months.
I live in Reno and LTE data speed is usually between 20 - 33 Mbps download and ~8 Mbps upload.
True, but then you get called an idiot when you get infected with malware for not using just the Play Store.
Indeed, this exact option is available to iOS users.
It's pretty odd, all the PlayStore APIs are done via https, but then the download is http. No idea why they'd do that.
Google PlayStore does NOT use https for actual downloads (check your own WiFi logs). So in theory, if you were connected to an insecure/public WiFi network someone could intercept your download request and replace it with a compromised download using available WiFi auditing tools.
Considering the original Cray XMP ran at 105MHz and had 16MB RAM, yes. But in 1982, those specs were just wildly insane.
Do you have a non-biased not-crazy-person source?
It's Apple's Game Center iOS has had since iOS5?
Considering OS X has a much higher share VS. Linux, and the fact that Safari is used on hundreds of millions of iOS devices...your comment is...full of shit?
Yes, people who bough $product that differs from $YourPreferredProduct are "iDiots".
Never mind that this happened during the iPad 1 era, when there was essentially no other player in the tablet market.
And OS X is an OS, and Chrome is a web browser (no matter how much Google pretends it isn't).
And they have nearly identical screens.
2560x1700 (Chromebook)
2560x1600 (MacBook)
So yes, it still makes far more sense to get the MacBook for $200 more to get the much faster CPU, 2x the RAM, and 4x the storage, and a legitimate OS.
When that "Core i5" is only 1.8Ghz and dual core, and when it has only 32GB of storage, and no a web browser for an OS, then yeah, it's just an overpriced NetBook.
Except for only a $200 difference the 13" MacBook Pro Retina is giving you a much faster CPU, 2x the RAM, and 4x the storage right out of the box.
You know Google is full of shit on the pricing when they make Apple look reasonable by comparison.
How so? The 13" Retina MacBook Pro does costs $200 more, but for that $200 you get:
2.5GHz i5 instead of the Chromebook Pixels 1.8GHz i5
Double the RAM (8GB)
4x the Storage (128GB SSD)
Longer battery life
Seems to me it's the Chromebook that's a ripoff here.
http://store.apple.com/us/configure/MD212LL/A?
If you'd gladly pay that price for the screen get a Retina MacBook Pro, and then put whatever OS you want on it.
$200 more than the Chromebook Pixel, but you also get MUCH better hardware (double the RAM, 4x the storage, and much faster CPU).
http://store.apple.com/us/configure/MD212LL/A?
Apple makes a $1299 computer that can only run a web browser?