Well, not really, since there are other GPLv2 apps on the store - the developer, who was part of the team that put VLC together objected after the fact, so Apple said "ok, we'll comply and take it down".
I think the FSF were expecting Apple to do something different (ie, do what the FSF "suggested" they do), rather than simply comply with the removal request. But hey, double win, since this means they can call it "being hostile to open source" and "removing open source apps from the store!"
Yes, there's already many open source apps on the App Store. You can even use the GPLv2 if you like - as much as the FSF would have you believe, Apple changed the ToS to make it more friendly towards it.
Alternatively there are plenty of other OSS licences you can use.
No, the problem was a developer asked (no, sorry demanded) it be removed, so Apple complied with that request. What else were they going to do?
Apple changed the app store licensing and ToS in response to the first GPL issue - it is compatible with GPLv2, but not with v3 due to the tivo-isation clause.
Seriously, if this was anything other than "apple" we'd all be talking about account security issues.
If your Apple ID is compromised then you either a) had an easy to guess password, b) logged into it on a computer with a keylogger installed, c) gave your password to someone you thought you could trust or d) sorcery - Apple products are magic after all.
Strong password that you don't share with anyone and up-to date security on any system you log in on = no problems.
I think the tech in Star Trek is that the whole power grid in starfleet equipment is essentially based on piping liquid plasma around in plumbing (the EPS grids), and that any powered device tapped into this supply and it was literally like turning on a tap to get power, thus when there were "surges" in the EPS system you had literal pressure waves of this charged plasma squirting all over place causing those touch panels and computers to explode.
I think using this as your power distribution method on what are essentially combat vessels is the same as using burning, open, top heavy containers of gasoline that are prevented from falling over by chocolate support beams as a way to heat the interior of a commercial airliner.
It works, but no one said it was sensible.
(also, sorry patent trolls, I have already filed).
mpeg is is a format, while mov is a container format. mpeg can go *inside* a mov container, but converting one to the other is like saying "I need a converter to change my coffee beans into a coffee jar".
If you mean the mpeg2 encoder, which Apple doesn't include by default with Quicktime (only the decoder) then that's the licensing fee problem. Apple are just passing the cost on. I guess they could eat the cost (like they do for the H.264 fee), but you'd have to take that up with them.
Yes, or should be properly sandboxed in the first place - this is something supposedly coming in 10.7. I'm not trying to justify the exploit or lessen the effectiveness - security breaches are serious, I was just addressing the point that not everyone who uses Apple products is standing with white earbuds in turned up to high volume going "lalalala no exploits on mac!" whenever security is brought up.
And slashdot is one of the few places where you have to add qualifying statements to generally colloquial English that "is better" is almost always a contraction of "for me personally, it is better".
Remember, this was the site that took Steve Jobs to task for claiming the iPhone 4's retina display was indistinguishable from high dpi pint at arm's length with a lengthy discussion about the average distance of a person's arm and the degrees of arc of human vision, just to get an Apple bash story and that Jobs' keynote figure was 2 or 3 inches out.
Thus, you have to twist around and be specifically verbose, lest you be accused of saying something you don't mean literally.
So wait, who is "being served" here? Apple or Apple 'fanbois'?
You originally claimed Apple, now you're saying it's the fanbois. You realise they don't speak for Apple, right? Just as neckbeards in parental basements don't speak for the Linux community as a whole.
If 3 guys working for 2 weeks to set up an exploit in the Webkit engine, and sitting on it until the contest is "getting served" then I suppose they did.
The way I see it, it took them considerable time to set up, and now we have another bug to patch (there are many). IE8 fell almost as quickly, but when has that been good linkbait? The result is "code has vulnerabilities, news at 11".
It's funny how those of that *do* say those things about Macs are conveniently ignored on slashdot, or lumped in as one job lot with people who know nothing about security and claim that OS X is immune. Or even have our intelligence questioned for our choice of computing environment. It's really quite tiresome.
The specific bug that was exploited in this case is in WebKit, so it's a concern for any browser based on it - Apple or not. The purpose of the contest is PR, but does lead to exploits being exposed and patched (albeit held back by the people going for the prizes so they have something to deploy as soon as the contest begins - it took those guys a lot of work to get it to the stage where they could deploy it quickly - they could have disclosed their method some time ago [but the same is true for all the exploits used in this contest, on all of the platforms]).
The attack order of the machines really has little ultimate value in the end - the fact that security holes exist in the first place is the take home message. I hope OS X keeps getting attacked - the more exploits are found, the more get closed off. I am careful with my machine, but I welcome disclosure and patching of bugs.
The bug they exploited was in Webkit, so I assume it also exists in Chrome too (and thus in Safari and Chrome on all platforms they run on) but I'm not sure exactly whether another vulnerability was also used in the OS X version, since it launched calculator and wrote a file to the hard drive.
Yes, exactly like buying Windows Vista Extreme Ultimate Hyper Edition every so often.
If you have an Intel Mac (which you need for 10.6 and 10.7), then you have owned since *at most* January 2006. In that time you could have had 10.4 (released April 05), 10.5 (released October 07), 10.6 (released August 2009).
The first one came with the Mac, so if you started on 10.4 you needed to buy 10.5 and 10.6 - so that's $129 for 10.5 and $29 for 10.6. $158 over 4 years is not too bad I think.
If your Intel Mac came with 10.5 you've only had the option to upgrade once - for $29.
But yes, I'm sure it's a grand conspiracy to force you to spend "another" $100 (when the price of Lion has yet to be confirmed).
I'm not talking just about Apple - note that I was talking generally, and even specifically mentioned Google as an example - it's right there in my comment. I am talking about the contest as a whole, including all of the operating systems and browsers involved, but feel free to ignore my point and just have an Apple bash. After all, we are on slashdot.
Also, talking about this specific bug, it was an exploit in WebKit - so are you now saying that WebKit is an Apple product? After so many years of "Apple just took KHTML and rebranded it and claimed all the credit" posts on slashdot, now suddenly it *is* an Apple product? You can't have it both ways.
My original point was referring to all browsers and operating systems involved, both with OSS components and closed code.
Well, given the information in the article it was non-trivial to write a working exploit of this bug, so the guy clearly put a lot of effort into it. However, if bugs like these were reported more as a matter of course then it would leave the *really* esoteric ones for contests like this, which would be a security win for everyone, since more difficult bugs would be exploited and squashed for money.
I think the people involved here are relatively altruistic in terms of security (ie, "white hat"), but I can't help thinking it's low hanging fruit that they have hidden behind a curtain, to be revealed in the day of the contest (for all platforms involved, not just Safari on OS X).
I own a "newer" european diesel and it is doing just fine as a gracefully ageing lady.
Diesels are pretty bombproof as long as they are maintained - I know several that are well on their way to 200k without being clapped out.
This "notorious" unreliability must be in a different Europe than the one I live in. I can't say I've ever heard anyone say that, and I'm friends with people who service cars for a living.
I'd personally call it 2-methylpropan-1-ol, but then, I always did like IUPAC.
I was saying that just the other day when I was stirring some (2R,3R,4S,5S,6R)-2-[(2S,3S,4S,5R)-3,4-dihydroxy-2,5-bis(hydroxymethyl)oxolan-2-yl]oxy-6-(hydroxymethyl)oxane-3,4,5-triol into my tea on my lunch break. I always had a sweet tooth.
Slashdot Mirror
And you just couldn't wait another second because...?
He wanted something useful right now?
Well, not really, since there are other GPLv2 apps on the store - the developer, who was part of the team that put VLC together objected after the fact, so Apple said "ok, we'll comply and take it down".
I think the FSF were expecting Apple to do something different (ie, do what the FSF "suggested" they do), rather than simply comply with the removal request. But hey, double win, since this means they can call it "being hostile to open source" and "removing open source apps from the store!"
No, just use the GPLv2 if you like. It's compatible with the App Store.
These guys:
http://maniacdev.com/2010/06/35-open-source-iphone-app-store-apps-updated-with-10-new-apps/
would like to disagree with you.
Yes, there's already many open source apps on the App Store. You can even use the GPLv2 if you like - as much as the FSF would have you believe, Apple changed the ToS to make it more friendly towards it.
Alternatively there are plenty of other OSS licences you can use.
Here are just a few:
http://maniacdev.com/2010/06/35-open-source-iphone-app-store-apps-updated-with-10-new-apps/
No, the problem was a developer asked (no, sorry demanded) it be removed, so Apple complied with that request. What else were they going to do?
Apple changed the app store licensing and ToS in response to the first GPL issue - it is compatible with GPLv2, but not with v3 due to the tivo-isation clause.
I blame your wife for having a shitty password.
Seriously, if this was anything other than "apple" we'd all be talking about account security issues.
If your Apple ID is compromised then you either a) had an easy to guess password, b) logged into it on a computer with a keylogger installed, c) gave your password to someone you thought you could trust or d) sorcery - Apple products are magic after all.
Strong password that you don't share with anyone and up-to date security on any system you log in on = no problems.
Slashdot's continual wailing that Apple need to face antitrust charges. That means they must have a monopoly, right?
I think the tech in Star Trek is that the whole power grid in starfleet equipment is essentially based on piping liquid plasma around in plumbing (the EPS grids), and that any powered device tapped into this supply and it was literally like turning on a tap to get power, thus when there were "surges" in the EPS system you had literal pressure waves of this charged plasma squirting all over place causing those touch panels and computers to explode.
I think using this as your power distribution method on what are essentially combat vessels is the same as using burning, open, top heavy containers of gasoline that are prevented from falling over by chocolate support beams as a way to heat the interior of a commercial airliner.
It works, but no one said it was sensible.
(also, sorry patent trolls, I have already filed).
So if we're allowing that sort of thing, the iPhone 3G is still supported. Just install Android on it.
What do you mean mpg to mov?
mpeg is is a format, while mov is a container format. mpeg can go *inside* a mov container, but converting one to the other is like saying "I need a converter to change my coffee beans into a coffee jar".
If you mean the mpeg2 encoder, which Apple doesn't include by default with Quicktime (only the decoder) then that's the licensing fee problem. Apple are just passing the cost on. I guess they could eat the cost (like they do for the H.264 fee), but you'd have to take that up with them.
Apologies - I rephrased part way through and forgot to go back and remove it. I spotted it after hitting submit.
Which if you're being genuinely altruistic about this sort of thing is a couple of weeks too long.
Yes, or should be properly sandboxed in the first place - this is something supposedly coming in 10.7. I'm not trying to justify the exploit or lessen the effectiveness - security breaches are serious, I was just addressing the point that not everyone who uses Apple products is standing with white earbuds in turned up to high volume going "lalalala no exploits on mac!" whenever security is brought up.
And slashdot is one of the few places where you have to add qualifying statements to generally colloquial English that "is better" is almost always a contraction of "for me personally, it is better".
Remember, this was the site that took Steve Jobs to task for claiming the iPhone 4's retina display was indistinguishable from high dpi pint at arm's length with a lengthy discussion about the average distance of a person's arm and the degrees of arc of human vision, just to get an Apple bash story and that Jobs' keynote figure was 2 or 3 inches out.
Thus, you have to twist around and be specifically verbose, lest you be accused of saying something you don't mean literally.
So wait, who is "being served" here? Apple or Apple 'fanbois'?
You originally claimed Apple, now you're saying it's the fanbois. You realise they don't speak for Apple, right? Just as neckbeards in parental basements don't speak for the Linux community as a whole.
Anyone can patch it - Webkit is open source!
I imagine it will be added to the next batch of security fixes.
If 3 guys working for 2 weeks to set up an exploit in the Webkit engine, and sitting on it until the contest is "getting served" then I suppose they did.
The way I see it, it took them considerable time to set up, and now we have another bug to patch (there are many). IE8 fell almost as quickly, but when has that been good linkbait? The result is "code has vulnerabilities, news at 11".
The more they find, the safer the code gets.
It's funny how those of that *do* say those things about Macs are conveniently ignored on slashdot, or lumped in as one job lot with people who know nothing about security and claim that OS X is immune. Or even have our intelligence questioned for our choice of computing environment. It's really quite tiresome.
The specific bug that was exploited in this case is in WebKit, so it's a concern for any browser based on it - Apple or not. The purpose of the contest is PR, but does lead to exploits being exposed and patched (albeit held back by the people going for the prizes so they have something to deploy as soon as the contest begins - it took those guys a lot of work to get it to the stage where they could deploy it quickly - they could have disclosed their method some time ago [but the same is true for all the exploits used in this contest, on all of the platforms]).
The attack order of the machines really has little ultimate value in the end - the fact that security holes exist in the first place is the take home message. I hope OS X keeps getting attacked - the more exploits are found, the more get closed off. I am careful with my machine, but I welcome disclosure and patching of bugs.
The bug they exploited was in Webkit, so I assume it also exists in Chrome too (and thus in Safari and Chrome on all platforms they run on) but I'm not sure exactly whether another vulnerability was also used in the OS X version, since it launched calculator and wrote a file to the hard drive.
Yes, exactly like buying Windows Vista Extreme Ultimate Hyper Edition every so often.
If you have an Intel Mac (which you need for 10.6 and 10.7), then you have owned since *at most* January 2006. In that time you could have had 10.4 (released April 05), 10.5 (released October 07), 10.6 (released August 2009).
The first one came with the Mac, so if you started on 10.4 you needed to buy 10.5 and 10.6 - so that's $129 for 10.5 and $29 for 10.6. $158 over 4 years is not too bad I think.
If your Intel Mac came with 10.5 you've only had the option to upgrade once - for $29.
But yes, I'm sure it's a grand conspiracy to force you to spend "another" $100 (when the price of Lion has yet to be confirmed).
I'm not talking just about Apple - note that I was talking generally, and even specifically mentioned Google as an example - it's right there in my comment. I am talking about the contest as a whole, including all of the operating systems and browsers involved, but feel free to ignore my point and just have an Apple bash. After all, we are on slashdot.
Also, talking about this specific bug, it was an exploit in WebKit - so are you now saying that WebKit is an Apple product? After so many years of "Apple just took KHTML and rebranded it and claimed all the credit" posts on slashdot, now suddenly it *is* an Apple product? You can't have it both ways.
My original point was referring to all browsers and operating systems involved, both with OSS components and closed code.
Well, given the information in the article it was non-trivial to write a working exploit of this bug, so the guy clearly put a lot of effort into it. However, if bugs like these were reported more as a matter of course then it would leave the *really* esoteric ones for contests like this, which would be a security win for everyone, since more difficult bugs would be exploited and squashed for money.
I think the people involved here are relatively altruistic in terms of security (ie, "white hat"), but I can't help thinking it's low hanging fruit that they have hidden behind a curtain, to be revealed in the day of the contest (for all platforms involved, not just Safari on OS X).
Love to see the cites on this.
I own a "newer" european diesel and it is doing just fine as a gracefully ageing lady.
Diesels are pretty bombproof as long as they are maintained - I know several that are well on their way to 200k without being clapped out.
This "notorious" unreliability must be in a different Europe than the one I live in. I can't say I've ever heard anyone say that, and I'm friends with people who service cars for a living.
I'd personally call it 2-methylpropan-1-ol, but then, I always did like IUPAC.
I was saying that just the other day when I was stirring some (2R,3R,4S,5S,6R)-2-[(2S,3S,4S,5R)-3,4-dihydroxy-2,5-bis(hydroxymethyl)oxolan-2-yl]oxy-6-(hydroxymethyl)oxane-3,4,5-triol into my tea on my lunch break. I always had a sweet tooth.