Hey guys, arguing about spelling isn't cool when the guys over at MacRumors are finding all sorts of fixes and improvements in this latest update. If the reports are accurate there are numerous fixes worth noting.
Like it or not, Apple continues updates/upgrades to iPhone software because the $$ it receives from the subscriber revenue - and not hardware sales - allows (motivates??) Apple to continue improving its product.
Absolutely baseless argument in this particular circumstance. The iPod Touch, for which there is no ongoing subsidization scheme, also received the same firmware update - this update really was totally free for everyone to enjoy with no strings attached.
Name one instance where someone blamed Apple for a third party application exposing an iPhone vulnerability. Just one.
there wouldn't be many examples because Apple has been on top of it. But people WOULD if they werent proactive. We know this because lots of people did just that with Microsoft. And their answer was to release more timely updates rather than waiting for the next service pack. If they leave the platform open to malicious attack, then the popularity of iPhone would go down the tube. Remember most people don't think of iPhone as a computer, they think of it as a snazzy iPod that happens to be a phone. They love it because it is what it is and it works. On a computer people expect that malicious software exists. They don't expect that from their phone though. Keeping it bottled up is the best thing they can do. You better believe that if there were tons of exploits because apple left it open, then people would attack the platform like crazy, moreso than any other device due to its popularity. This would frustrate people more than it would make a few people happy.
there wouldn't be many examples because Apple has been on top of it. But people WOULD if they werent proactive. We know this because lots of people did just that with Microsoft. And their answer was to release more timely updates rather than waiting for the next service pack. If they leave the platform open to malicious attack, then the popularity of iPhone would go down the tube. Remember most people don't think of iPhone as a computer, they think of it as a snazzy iPod that happens to be a phone. They love it because it is what it is and it works. On a computer people expect that malicious software exists. They don't expect that from their phone though. Keeping it bottled up is the best thing they can do. You better believe that if there were tons of exploits because apple left it open, then people would attack the platform like crazy, moreso than any other device due to its popularity. This would frustrate people more than it would make a few people happy.
Like it or not, Apple continues updates/upgrades to iPhone software because the $$ it receives from the subscriber revenue - and not hardware sales - allows (motivates??) Apple to continue improving its product.
So if their updates causes the freeloaders, hackers, slackers, and whiners more headaches and complaints as to why they can't partake in a support feature for free - and without problems - as opposed to only those that actually pay for the privilege... it sucks to be you.
I dont' think the SDK bandwagon will make it any easier in certain aspects. If Apple opens it up more to development similar to how it was with Palm back when, more power to them and I would be first to sign up as I see nothing but a positive impact by that move.
But the same mantra will still apply. Don't bitch about wanting something for free that everyone else has to pay for. Apple doesn't continue the R&D for the iPhone simply because it's cool. They are no different than any other company that needs to make money.
I've been an Cingular->AT&T customer for 10+ years. Are they perfect?? Far from it. All the other providers are not perfect either. But I've been relatively happy with them. Is it right that AT&T is the exclusive provider? History will be the judge of that. Do I bitch about not having a Lamborghini as an everyday car? No. So if the iPhone is not available for whatever reason in your town/state/country/planet/whatever, that is just life. If you can hack it up enough to get it to work, kudos to you. But don't expect an easy ride from Apple. You own the hardware, but not the OS software. Get over it.
Let the flamebaiting begin (again).
So Apple can't just update their product and fix bugs they find without people going into conspiracy theory mode and saying its only done to lock out hackers? People will whine if they don't fix bugs, but will also whine if they DO, because we think they are simply patching the jailbreaks?
Thank you. And ... For the record I did jailbreak my phone. But I quickly came to realize that everything else was just gimicky and served no use other than time wasters. What would make this useful is a good financial package and something to edit excel spreadsheets, which does not really exist in the hacking world anyways. For those I'm waiting for SDK and well known mobile developers to produce those apps. So, I opted to unjailbreak my phone, which to me is kind of useless because all of the apps are made by hackers. And big professional apps are less likely to be produced by them.
there wouldn't be many examples because Apple has been on top of it. But people WOULD if they werent proactive. We know this because lots of people did just that with Microsoft. And their answer was to release more timely updates rather than waiting for the next service pack. If they leave the platform open to malicious attack, then the popularity of iPhone would go down the tube. Remember most people don't think of iPhone as a computer, they think of it as a snazzy iPod that happens to be a phone. They love it because it is what it is and it works. On a computer people expect that malicious software exists. They don't expect that from their phone though. Keeping it bottled up is the best thing they can do. You better believe that if there were tons of exploits because apple left it open, then people would attack the platform like crazy, moreso than any other device due to its popularity. This would frustrate people more than it would make a few people happy.
I don't exactly buy that as Symbian has a much larger installation base and it we are not inundated with attacks. Also that totally ridiculous argument that "rouge" applications could bring down an entire IN cell network and the kool aid drinkers believed it. Apple wants to maintain control of the money and they do it via advertising knowing that gullible people will buy it. I have no problems with a signing process similar to Symbian, but without all of the so-called consumer protection that Apple tries to sell.
So Apple can't just update their product and fix bugs they find without people going into conspiracy theory mode and saying its only done to lock out hackers? People will whine if they don't fix bugs, but will also whine if they DO, because we think they are simply patching the jailbreaks?
I don't exactly buy that as Symbian has a much larger installation base and it we are not inundated with attacks. Also that totally ridiculous argument that "rouge" applications could bring down an entire IN cell network and the kool aid drinkers believed it. Apple wants to maintain control of the money and they do it via advertising knowing that gullible people will buy it. I have no problems with a signing process similar to Symbian, but without all of the so-called consumer protection that Apple tries to sell.
Symbian for the most part is bottled up. It is a proprietary architecture with development made through its SDK. Development for Symbian for the most part happens within certain confines. iPhone on the other hand is extremely different because it uses a Unix style kernel, which, if not bottled up, is very well known to hackers and other people wishing to attack it. The fact that it is a well known architecture (Unix) makes it more imperative that it is locked up.
The way it SHOULD work is (just like Symbian) that software development needs to happen within the confines specified by Apple through the SDK. And the only way to keep those "boundries" (tokeep malicious developers from crossing them) is to bottle it up. Otherwise you will get boatloads of problems (again, because it uses a powerful and well known back end).
And .... where did I say I believe that any malicious program would bring down the entire network? That is for the most part not possible, UNLESS most iPhones were infected with a smurfing trojan and all activated at one time in a DOS (Denial of Service) attack against something on the Internet. Which, is possible but not probable.
Symbian for the most part is bottled up. It is a proprietary architecture with development made through its SDK. Development for Symbian for the most part happens within certain confines. iPhone on the other hand is extremely different because it uses a Unix style kernel, which, if not bottled up, is very well known to hackers and other people wishing to attack it. The fact that it is a well known architecture (Unix) makes it more imperative that it is locked up.
The way it SHOULD work is (just like Symbian) that software development needs to happen within the confines specified by Apple through the SDK. And the only way to keep those "boundries" (tokeep malicious developers from crossing them) is to bottle it up. Otherwise you will get boatloads of problems (again, because it uses a powerful and well known back end).
And .... where did I say I believe that any malicious program would bring down the entire network? That is for the most part not possible, UNLESS most iPhones were infected with a smurfing trojan and all activated at one time in a DOS (Denial of Service) attack against something on the Internet. Which, is possible but not probable.
I would also like to add to this that the SDK (whenever it DOES happen), should (and I say SHOULD) make application development safer because like Symbian, the development happens within borders (a root jail, which is a common Unix term, and the reason it is called jailbreaking).
Although, knowing a lot of Unix hackers doing what I do, I seriously doubt an SDK would stop ALL of the hacking. I think there will still be some breaking of the root jail software is supposed to "live" in just because some people just don't like confinement. So, Apple will still need to stay on top of it ... it just won't be so much in the foreground.
No applications yet, but with 1.1.4, if you drag/drop a bookmark from page 1 to page 2, then press and hold it for 2 seconds, an horizontal line appears dividing the page in two, the upper has the title "Applications", the bottom part has the title "Bookmarks". Dragging th icon or realising it will make the titles disappear.
\
I just updated and no sign of this. But i can now get 8 pages!
To do it I had to put one app or link on each page.
So Apple can't just update their product and fix bugs they find without people going into conspiracy theory mode and saying its only done to lock out hackers? People will whine if they don't fix bugs, but will also whine if they DO, because we think they are simply patching the jailbreaks?
I think it's easy to assume, guess and worry when they can't be bothered to specifiy what they're fixing.
Symbian for the most part is bottled up. It is a proprietary architecture with development made through its SDK. Development for Symbian for the most part happens within certain confines. iPhone on the other hand is extremely different because it uses a Unix style kernel, which, if not bottled up, is very well known to hackers and other people wishing to attack it. The fact that it is a well known architecture (Unix) makes it more imperative that it is locked up.
The way it SHOULD work is (just like Symbian) that software development needs to happen within the confines specified by Apple through the SDK. And the only way to keep those "boundries" (tokeep malicious developers from crossing them) is to bottle it up. Otherwise you will get boatloads of problems (again, because it uses a powerful and well known back end).
And .... where did I say I believe that any malicious program would bring down the entire network? That is for the most part not possible, UNLESS most iPhones were infected with a smurfing trojan and all activated at one time in a DOS (Denial of Service) attack against something on the Internet. Which, is possible but not probable.
Survey says: not exactly true. I have Symbian programmer friends and they laugh at the way Apple passes down a decree and people simply swallow it hook line and sinker. They program in an environment where the ability to write malicious code exists but where is this code. Symbian come in two flavors and there is still no viable virus attacks that have crippled thousand or even tens of phones. Apple is no more secure than Symbian in this respect. Into the realm of opinion I think that Apple is simply using this as a way to control content distribution and in the end profits. However being that Apple has not invited me to any internal briefings, my opinions are no more valid than yours.
As for the network crashing thing, sorry that it appeared I applied that to you. It was meant to those here in general that continue to believe this network crashing app lie that Apple and AT&T put forth. No offense to you there and my bad if it appeared this way.
Survey says: not exactly true. I have Symbian programmer friends and they laugh at the way Apple passes down a decree and people simply swallow it hook line and sinker. They program in an environment where the ability to write malicious code exists but where is this code. Symbian come in two flavors and there is still no viable virus attacks that have crippled thousand or even tens of phones. Apple is no more secure than Symbian in this respect. Into the realm of opinion I think that Apple is simply using this as a way to control content distribution and in the end profits. However being that Apple has not invited me to any internal briefings, my opinions are no more valid than yours.
As for the network crashing thing, sorry that it appeared I applied that to you. It was meant to those here in general that continue to believe this network crashing app lie that Apple and AT&T put forth. No offense to you there and my bad if it appeared this way.
Ummmmm you don't get the difference. Of course its possible to write malicious code. The DIFFERENCE is, that in Symbian, a programmer does not have access to the BASE operating system. For the most part, they can't go to the lowest level of THAT operating system and tinker with its base. They all work with an upper layer of the environment.
With the iPhone we use Unix. You can get down to the lowest level of THIS operating environment and tinker with the base. What Apple needs to do is create an upper layer that developers can live in.
Ask your Symbian developer friends if the Symbian tools allow you to go to the boot loader, strip away the entire operating system, and replace it with something else. The most they can do is effect UI. With the iPhone, it is entirely possible to do just that. And at THAT level, you can do way more to the OS.
Comments
No it should not.
Ah. You're right.
DAve
"What do you mean by size?
I think he meant in inches.
Like it or not, Apple continues updates/upgrades to iPhone software because the $$ it receives from the subscriber revenue - and not hardware sales - allows (motivates??) Apple to continue improving its product.
Absolutely baseless argument in this particular circumstance. The iPod Touch, for which there is no ongoing subsidization scheme, also received the same firmware update - this update really was totally free for everyone to enjoy with no strings attached.
"supersedes" should be spelled "supercedes".
No, it is supersedes, although the cedes version is commonly accepted now because it was used incorrectly for so long.
Name one instance where someone blamed Apple for a third party application exposing an iPhone vulnerability. Just one.
there wouldn't be many examples because Apple has been on top of it. But people WOULD if they werent proactive. We know this because lots of people did just that with Microsoft. And their answer was to release more timely updates rather than waiting for the next service pack. If they leave the platform open to malicious attack, then the popularity of iPhone would go down the tube. Remember most people don't think of iPhone as a computer, they think of it as a snazzy iPod that happens to be a phone. They love it because it is what it is and it works. On a computer people expect that malicious software exists. They don't expect that from their phone though. Keeping it bottled up is the best thing they can do. You better believe that if there were tons of exploits because apple left it open, then people would attack the platform like crazy, moreso than any other device due to its popularity. This would frustrate people more than it would make a few people happy.
there wouldn't be many examples because Apple has been on top of it. But people WOULD if they werent proactive. We know this because lots of people did just that with Microsoft. And their answer was to release more timely updates rather than waiting for the next service pack. If they leave the platform open to malicious attack, then the popularity of iPhone would go down the tube. Remember most people don't think of iPhone as a computer, they think of it as a snazzy iPod that happens to be a phone. They love it because it is what it is and it works. On a computer people expect that malicious software exists. They don't expect that from their phone though. Keeping it bottled up is the best thing they can do. You better believe that if there were tons of exploits because apple left it open, then people would attack the platform like crazy, moreso than any other device due to its popularity. This would frustrate people more than it would make a few people happy.
Good answer. Welcome to AI.
Like it or not, Apple continues updates/upgrades to iPhone software because the $$ it receives from the subscriber revenue - and not hardware sales - allows (motivates??) Apple to continue improving its product.
So if their updates causes the freeloaders, hackers, slackers, and whiners more headaches and complaints as to why they can't partake in a support feature for free - and without problems - as opposed to only those that actually pay for the privilege... it sucks to be you.
I dont' think the SDK bandwagon will make it any easier in certain aspects. If Apple opens it up more to development similar to how it was with Palm back when, more power to them and I would be first to sign up as I see nothing but a positive impact by that move.
But the same mantra will still apply. Don't bitch about wanting something for free that everyone else has to pay for. Apple doesn't continue the R&D for the iPhone simply because it's cool. They are no different than any other company that needs to make money.
I've been an Cingular->AT&T customer for 10+ years. Are they perfect?? Far from it. All the other providers are not perfect either. But I've been relatively happy with them. Is it right that AT&T is the exclusive provider? History will be the judge of that. Do I bitch about not having a Lamborghini as an everyday car? No. So if the iPhone is not available for whatever reason in your town/state/country/planet/whatever, that is just life. If you can hack it up enough to get it to work, kudos to you. But don't expect an easy ride from Apple. You own the hardware, but not the OS software. Get over it.
Let the flamebaiting begin (again).
So Apple can't just update their product and fix bugs they find without people going into conspiracy theory mode and saying its only done to lock out hackers? People will whine if they don't fix bugs, but will also whine if they DO, because we think they are simply patching the jailbreaks?
Good answer. Welcome to AI.
Thank you. And ... For the record I did jailbreak my phone. But I quickly came to realize that everything else was just gimicky and served no use other than time wasters. What would make this useful is a good financial package and something to edit excel spreadsheets, which does not really exist in the hacking world anyways. For those I'm waiting for SDK and well known mobile developers to produce those apps. So, I opted to unjailbreak my phone, which to me is kind of useless because all of the apps are made by hackers. And big professional apps are less likely to be produced by them.
there wouldn't be many examples because Apple has been on top of it. But people WOULD if they werent proactive. We know this because lots of people did just that with Microsoft. And their answer was to release more timely updates rather than waiting for the next service pack. If they leave the platform open to malicious attack, then the popularity of iPhone would go down the tube. Remember most people don't think of iPhone as a computer, they think of it as a snazzy iPod that happens to be a phone. They love it because it is what it is and it works. On a computer people expect that malicious software exists. They don't expect that from their phone though. Keeping it bottled up is the best thing they can do. You better believe that if there were tons of exploits because apple left it open, then people would attack the platform like crazy, moreso than any other device due to its popularity. This would frustrate people more than it would make a few people happy.
I don't exactly buy that as Symbian has a much larger installation base and it we are not inundated with attacks. Also that totally ridiculous argument that "rouge" applications could bring down an entire IN cell network and the kool aid drinkers believed it. Apple wants to maintain control of the money and they do it via advertising knowing that gullible people will buy it. I have no problems with a signing process similar to Symbian, but without all of the so-called consumer protection that Apple tries to sell.
So Apple can't just update their product and fix bugs they find without people going into conspiracy theory mode and saying its only done to lock out hackers? People will whine if they don't fix bugs, but will also whine if they DO, because we think they are simply patching the jailbreaks?
That's a very good point.
I don't exactly buy that as Symbian has a much larger installation base and it we are not inundated with attacks. Also that totally ridiculous argument that "rouge" applications could bring down an entire IN cell network and the kool aid drinkers believed it. Apple wants to maintain control of the money and they do it via advertising knowing that gullible people will buy it. I have no problems with a signing process similar to Symbian, but without all of the so-called consumer protection that Apple tries to sell.
Symbian for the most part is bottled up. It is a proprietary architecture with development made through its SDK. Development for Symbian for the most part happens within certain confines. iPhone on the other hand is extremely different because it uses a Unix style kernel, which, if not bottled up, is very well known to hackers and other people wishing to attack it. The fact that it is a well known architecture (Unix) makes it more imperative that it is locked up.
The way it SHOULD work is (just like Symbian) that software development needs to happen within the confines specified by Apple through the SDK. And the only way to keep those "boundries" (tokeep malicious developers from crossing them) is to bottle it up. Otherwise you will get boatloads of problems (again, because it uses a powerful and well known back end).
And .... where did I say I believe that any malicious program would bring down the entire network? That is for the most part not possible, UNLESS most iPhones were infected with a smurfing trojan and all activated at one time in a DOS (Denial of Service) attack against something on the Internet. Which, is possible but not probable.
Symbian for the most part is bottled up. It is a proprietary architecture with development made through its SDK. Development for Symbian for the most part happens within certain confines. iPhone on the other hand is extremely different because it uses a Unix style kernel, which, if not bottled up, is very well known to hackers and other people wishing to attack it. The fact that it is a well known architecture (Unix) makes it more imperative that it is locked up.
The way it SHOULD work is (just like Symbian) that software development needs to happen within the confines specified by Apple through the SDK. And the only way to keep those "boundries" (tokeep malicious developers from crossing them) is to bottle it up. Otherwise you will get boatloads of problems (again, because it uses a powerful and well known back end).
And .... where did I say I believe that any malicious program would bring down the entire network? That is for the most part not possible, UNLESS most iPhones were infected with a smurfing trojan and all activated at one time in a DOS (Denial of Service) attack against something on the Internet. Which, is possible but not probable.
I would also like to add to this that the SDK (whenever it DOES happen), should (and I say SHOULD) make application development safer because like Symbian, the development happens within borders (a root jail, which is a common Unix term, and the reason it is called jailbreaking).
Although, knowing a lot of Unix hackers doing what I do, I seriously doubt an SDK would stop ALL of the hacking. I think there will still be some breaking of the root jail software is supposed to "live" in just because some people just don't like confinement. So, Apple will still need to stay on top of it ... it just won't be so much in the foreground.
No applications yet, but with 1.1.4, if you drag/drop a bookmark from page 1 to page 2, then press and hold it for 2 seconds, an horizontal line appears dividing the page in two, the upper has the title "Applications", the bottom part has the title "Bookmarks". Dragging th icon or realising it will make the titles disappear.
I just updated and no sign of this. But i can now get 8 pages!
To do it I had to put one app or link on each page.
So Apple can't just update their product and fix bugs they find without people going into conspiracy theory mode and saying its only done to lock out hackers? People will whine if they don't fix bugs, but will also whine if they DO, because we think they are simply patching the jailbreaks?
I think it's easy to assume, guess and worry when they can't be bothered to specifiy what they're fixing.
Symbian for the most part is bottled up. It is a proprietary architecture with development made through its SDK. Development for Symbian for the most part happens within certain confines. iPhone on the other hand is extremely different because it uses a Unix style kernel, which, if not bottled up, is very well known to hackers and other people wishing to attack it. The fact that it is a well known architecture (Unix) makes it more imperative that it is locked up.
The way it SHOULD work is (just like Symbian) that software development needs to happen within the confines specified by Apple through the SDK. And the only way to keep those "boundries" (tokeep malicious developers from crossing them) is to bottle it up. Otherwise you will get boatloads of problems (again, because it uses a powerful and well known back end).
And .... where did I say I believe that any malicious program would bring down the entire network? That is for the most part not possible, UNLESS most iPhones were infected with a smurfing trojan and all activated at one time in a DOS (Denial of Service) attack against something on the Internet. Which, is possible but not probable.
Survey says: not exactly true. I have Symbian programmer friends and they laugh at the way Apple passes down a decree and people simply swallow it hook line and sinker. They program in an environment where the ability to write malicious code exists but where is this code. Symbian come in two flavors and there is still no viable virus attacks that have crippled thousand or even tens of phones. Apple is no more secure than Symbian in this respect. Into the realm of opinion I think that Apple is simply using this as a way to control content distribution and in the end profits. However being that Apple has not invited me to any internal briefings, my opinions are no more valid than yours.
As for the network crashing thing, sorry that it appeared I applied that to you. It was meant to those here in general that continue to believe this network crashing app lie that Apple and AT&T put forth. No offense to you there and my bad if it appeared this way.
Survey says: not exactly true. I have Symbian programmer friends and they laugh at the way Apple passes down a decree and people simply swallow it hook line and sinker. They program in an environment where the ability to write malicious code exists but where is this code. Symbian come in two flavors and there is still no viable virus attacks that have crippled thousand or even tens of phones. Apple is no more secure than Symbian in this respect. Into the realm of opinion I think that Apple is simply using this as a way to control content distribution and in the end profits. However being that Apple has not invited me to any internal briefings, my opinions are no more valid than yours.
As for the network crashing thing, sorry that it appeared I applied that to you. It was meant to those here in general that continue to believe this network crashing app lie that Apple and AT&T put forth. No offense to you there and my bad if it appeared this way.
Ummmmm you don't get the difference. Of course its possible to write malicious code. The DIFFERENCE is, that in Symbian, a programmer does not have access to the BASE operating system. For the most part, they can't go to the lowest level of THAT operating system and tinker with its base. They all work with an upper layer of the environment.
With the iPhone we use Unix. You can get down to the lowest level of THIS operating environment and tinker with the base. What Apple needs to do is create an upper layer that developers can live in.
Ask your Symbian developer friends if the Symbian tools allow you to go to the boot loader, strip away the entire operating system, and replace it with something else. The most they can do is effect UI. With the iPhone, it is entirely possible to do just that. And at THAT level, you can do way more to the OS.