I think there are some vulnerabilities in other areas too, like in the Bluetooth and Wi-Fi drivers, that might leave you vulnerable just by having one or both of those radios on. Not 100% sure about that though and the risk is probably minimal since it would require close physical proximity.
Why does Valve even care where their games are played
Because Microsoft still has multiple monopolies generating enormous amounts of profit, so they can keep trying to crush Steam with the Microsoft Store indefinitely. It's good for Steam to keep a Plan B around.
I'm not happy with the direction Microsoft is going with Windows 10 either (telemetry, ads, etc.) but not staying up-to-date with patches is foolish since the patches fix known vulnerabilities, often in base libraries used by all the applications on your system, so just keeping Firefox or Chrome up-to-date is not sufficient.
If someone finds Windows updates unacceptable, they should switch to an entirely different OS, rather than advocate not patching.
Would you prefer that your computer be attacked by a botnet of people who failed to opt-in to security updates?
I'm convinced half of the posts here that encourage people to not install Windows updates are from Russian trolls that want U.S. computers infested with malware.
Good thoughts. I think you might be right. The only "solution" might be to be able to switch back and forth between "tablet mode" apps and "laptop mode" apps or something. A lot of extra UI work would be involved for each application... It'll be interesting to see where things go from here!
Self driving cars are mostly hype. They're primarily self driving on very good, very clean, very well mapped roads only. Take them out of perfect conditions, and they fail miserably.
That being said, the technology is still cool, even though it has a long, long way to go. A lot of the technology could eventually be incorporated into normal everyday cars to help human drivers avoid accidents.
But the hype, at this point, is kind of out of control.
That's just a matter of software, not hardware capabilities.
I agree. When you said "technologically speaking," I wasn't sure if you were talking about hardware, software, or both. I agree that modern tablet hardware is more than capable these days.
If you're attaching a keyboard and mouse to a tablet, aren't you pretty much acknowledging that what you really need is a laptop and not a tablet?
I don't think so. For example, I frequently use my Bluetooth keyboard with my tablet. The tablet still does everything I need (for certain use cases). The keyboard just makes some things much easier. Like typing this comment.:)
We've seen several well-publicized, failed attempts at merging mouse and touch paradigms. I'm not sure why you have such faith that Apple could pull this off where everyone else so far has failed miserably.
Honestly, I think Apple could pull it off, but I don't think they will. They're too stubborn to try.
When I dock my tablet on my Bluetooth keyboard, it very much looks and feels like a small laptop. Reaching up to interact with the screen is terrible, though. (When I'm using the keyboard, I'm usually at a desk or table.) At those times, a mouse would be much better, similar to when using the BT keyboard is better.
But maybe you're right -- maybe it's not feasible to have a good touch interface and a good mouse interface on a single device. I'm not really sure.
I was under the impression Swift Playgrounds was for learning the basics of Swift and not a development environment that could be used to create first class iOS applications.
You're nuts. I'd agree that perhaps it should be four, maybe, and that three is a little shorter than is ideal. But "ridiculously"? I think you need to buy a dictionary.
If we're talking about Google's devices here, it's not even 3 years unless you buy the phone the day it becomes available on their web site. I think it's pretty sensible to wait a minimum of 6 months to purchase new tech so that the inevitable new-device issues can be discovered and worked out. That brings its lifetime down to 2.5 years -- and that's just for security updates. Regular (non-security) updates would be an obscenely short 1.5 years. 1.5 years!
I've never looked at Apple's official update policy, but history suggests about 5 years -- which includes both regular updates and security updates. Apple is crushing Google here.
And, to be clear, I'm not an Apple fanboy. I think most people would be happy with Android or iOS. And the terribly buggy iOS 11 has certainly shaken my faith in Apple management to continue to do the right thing for their customers. I'm only talking about regular updates and security updates here. This is one area where Google is really weak and Apple is strong.
I can't possibly imagine what gave you the idea that I buy phones from bargain-bin carriers. I'm at iPhone user. Not religiously so, though -- every time it comes time to buy a new phone, I reevaluate the entire marketplace. For me, the iPhone is actually quite a bit cheaper, once you factor in (cost of phone / years of service).
I'm not sure why -- this is probably just a weird emotional thing -- but in my head I consider 5 years of security updates a minimum expectation.
I'm most concerned about security updates. I thought even the mighty Google only pushed out 3 years of security updates, and that 3 years starts from when the product first appears on their web site for sale. If you're even a little conservative about new tech (like me) and wait 6-12 months before pulling the trigger on a new product, that means only 2 to 2.5 years of security updates, not to mention regular updates, which you'd only get for 1 to 1.5 years.
I guess at the moment I'm a little spoiled by iPhone, since I can buy a new one every 2.5 years or so, and pass on the old phone to my kid to use for 2.5 years. That's a 5 year life span for each phone. Once I take (price of phone / years of service), iPhone comes out way cheaper than anything I can buy in the Android ecosystem, for my use case at least. Granted, I'm a stickler about only using tech that's still getting security updates. I'm sure lots of people don't worry about security as much as I do.
Given the ridiculously short amount of time Android devices get updates -- including devices from Google itself -- how can this possibly be true from a realistic viewpoint?
Slashdot Mirror
I think there are some vulnerabilities in other areas too, like in the Bluetooth and Wi-Fi drivers, that might leave you vulnerable just by having one or both of those radios on. Not 100% sure about that though and the risk is probably minimal since it would require close physical proximity.
Aren't you worried about security vulnerabilities in such an old model of the phone (thus firmwares) and OS?
You seem happy about the potential prospect of an Android monoculture. That doesn't seem like such a good idea.
Why does Valve even care where their games are played
Because Microsoft still has multiple monopolies generating enormous amounts of profit, so they can keep trying to crush Steam with the Microsoft Store indefinitely. It's good for Steam to keep a Plan B around.
I'm not happy with the direction Microsoft is going with Windows 10 either (telemetry, ads, etc.) but not staying up-to-date with patches is foolish since the patches fix known vulnerabilities, often in base libraries used by all the applications on your system, so just keeping Firefox or Chrome up-to-date is not sufficient.
If someone finds Windows updates unacceptable, they should switch to an entirely different OS, rather than advocate not patching.
Would you prefer that your computer be attacked by a botnet of people who failed to opt-in to security updates?
I'm convinced half of the posts here that encourage people to not install Windows updates are from Russian trolls that want U.S. computers infested with malware.
Good thoughts. I think you might be right. The only "solution" might be to be able to switch back and forth between "tablet mode" apps and "laptop mode" apps or something. A lot of extra UI work would be involved for each application... It'll be interesting to see where things go from here!
It's not working for me. Could you give me precise steps? Thanks!
Chromebooks only run chrome so it's not practical.
I think Google is working toward Chromebooks also running Android applications. I think many Chromebooks already do.
Self driving cars are mostly hype. They're primarily self driving on very good, very clean, very well mapped roads only. Take them out of perfect conditions, and they fail miserably.
That being said, the technology is still cool, even though it has a long, long way to go. A lot of the technology could eventually be incorporated into normal everyday cars to help human drivers avoid accidents.
But the hype, at this point, is kind of out of control.
BlueTooth mice work perfectly fine on iOS.
Are you sure? From what I've read, that doesn't seem to be the case.
That's just a matter of software, not hardware capabilities.
I agree. When you said "technologically speaking," I wasn't sure if you were talking about hardware, software, or both. I agree that modern tablet hardware is more than capable these days.
If you're attaching a keyboard and mouse to a tablet, aren't you pretty much acknowledging that what you really need is a laptop and not a tablet?
I don't think so. For example, I frequently use my Bluetooth keyboard with my tablet. The tablet still does everything I need (for certain use cases). The keyboard just makes some things much easier. Like typing this comment. :)
We've seen several well-publicized, failed attempts at merging mouse and touch paradigms. I'm not sure why you have such faith that Apple could pull this off where everyone else so far has failed miserably.
Honestly, I think Apple could pull it off, but I don't think they will. They're too stubborn to try.
When I dock my tablet on my Bluetooth keyboard, it very much looks and feels like a small laptop. Reaching up to interact with the screen is terrible, though. (When I'm using the keyboard, I'm usually at a desk or table.) At those times, a mouse would be much better, similar to when using the BT keyboard is better.
But maybe you're right -- maybe it's not feasible to have a good touch interface and a good mouse interface on a single device. I'm not really sure.
I was under the impression Swift Playgrounds was for learning the basics of Swift and not a development environment that could be used to create first class iOS applications.
Now that there's nothing more these tablets need to do, technologically speaking, they really need to start coming down in price.
I wish I could develop real iOS apps on my iPad. :(
Lack of mouse support really sucks, too...
You're nuts. I'd agree that perhaps it should be four, maybe, and that three is a little shorter than is ideal. But "ridiculously"? I think you need to buy a dictionary.
If we're talking about Google's devices here, it's not even 3 years unless you buy the phone the day it becomes available on their web site. I think it's pretty sensible to wait a minimum of 6 months to purchase new tech so that the inevitable new-device issues can be discovered and worked out. That brings its lifetime down to 2.5 years -- and that's just for security updates. Regular (non-security) updates would be an obscenely short 1.5 years. 1.5 years!
I've never looked at Apple's official update policy, but history suggests about 5 years -- which includes both regular updates and security updates. Apple is crushing Google here.
And, to be clear, I'm not an Apple fanboy. I think most people would be happy with Android or iOS. And the terribly buggy iOS 11 has certainly shaken my faith in Apple management to continue to do the right thing for their customers. I'm only talking about regular updates and security updates here. This is one area where Google is really weak and Apple is strong.
That's pretty good. Is that length of support common, or somewhat unique to Samsung, or...?
Three years is ridiculously short?
YES!
*bark* *bark* *bark* *bark* *bark* *bark* *bark* *bark* *bark* *bark* *bark*
*BLAM* *BLAM*
NO TERRIER
I can't possibly imagine what gave you the idea that I buy phones from bargain-bin carriers. I'm at iPhone user. Not religiously so, though -- every time it comes time to buy a new phone, I reevaluate the entire marketplace. For me, the iPhone is actually quite a bit cheaper, once you factor in (cost of phone / years of service).
I'm not sure why -- this is probably just a weird emotional thing -- but in my head I consider 5 years of security updates a minimum expectation.
I'm most concerned about security updates. I thought even the mighty Google only pushed out 3 years of security updates, and that 3 years starts from when the product first appears on their web site for sale. If you're even a little conservative about new tech (like me) and wait 6-12 months before pulling the trigger on a new product, that means only 2 to 2.5 years of security updates, not to mention regular updates, which you'd only get for 1 to 1.5 years.
I guess at the moment I'm a little spoiled by iPhone, since I can buy a new one every 2.5 years or so, and pass on the old phone to my kid to use for 2.5 years. That's a 5 year life span for each phone. Once I take (price of phone / years of service), iPhone comes out way cheaper than anything I can buy in the Android ecosystem, for my use case at least. Granted, I'm a stickler about only using tech that's still getting security updates. I'm sure lots of people don't worry about security as much as I do.
Unfortunately, that might make them even more susceptible to bribery -- oops, I mean, lobbying.
Given the ridiculously short amount of time Android devices get updates -- including devices from Google itself -- how can this possibly be true from a realistic viewpoint?
FU BM
Settings > General > Keyboard > Smart Puncuation
(On any iPhone or iPad)
Good news is that Pixel phones and before are only guaranteed for 2 years of Android updates and 3 for security, Pixel 2 phones are 3 years each.
2 and 3 years from the date the phone was first made available for sale, right? Not from the date you purchased it.
What a joke...