or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by d4NjvRzf

They could have chosen worse. Motorola is just about the only Android OEM that pushed back against Microsoft (and with some success: e.g. http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/13/12/07/1241221/german-court-invalidates-microsoft-fat-patent) instead of simply folding. 
1) I see a speaker in the center of each bezel. Where would you squeeze in a fingerprint sensor?2) Instead of simply making it easier to unlock the phone when it's lying face up, why not try to remove the need to repeatedly unlock your phone? If I'm already at my desk, I'd rather mirror the notifications to my main computer and deal with them there instead of juggling multiple devices. 
The problem, as they say, is not software patents per se, but rather the quality of patents. Joel Spolsky (former Microsofter) had this to say: "Software developers don’t actually invent very much. The number of actually novel, non-obvious inventions in the software industry that maybe, in some universe, deserve a government-granted monopoly is, perhaps, two.The other 40,000-odd software patents issued every year are mostly garbage that any working programmer could...
Where did you get the idea that new OS's from Apple are free? When you buy a Mac, you're not just paying for a computer with a blank SSD.
By that logic, car manufacturers should be able to control what color you paint your car, or Ralph Lauren should be able to forbid you from wearing certain accessories in conjunction with Ralph Lauren shirts.
 While a SE+NFC combination may be the best option when you have to use NFC, you don't use NFC for remote transactions.  You were suggesting that NFC is necessary to employ a secure element when it is not necessarily even relevant. Secure elements come in multiple form factors (https://www.globalplatform.org/mediaguideSE.asp), and adding an NFC module to a secure element does not magically increase its security.
You have never explained how the NFC secures the SE or why the SE would be inherently less secure with another form of wireless transmission or with no wireless transmission mechanism at all. The most plausible reason for why the iPad includes an NFC chip is the same reason why Intel ships dual core CPUs which are actually quad cores with two cores disabled; it's cheaper that way than creating a separate manufacturing line. What's your theory?
Apple chose to combine the NFC chip and secure element in one chip to save space or ease manufacturing, but no one decreed it has to be that way. You can have NFC without a secure element or vice versa. A secure element is just a form of hardware backed storage. It can be embedded in the device, in the SIM card, or in an SD card (http://www.smartcardalliance.org/publications-nfc-frequently-asked-questions/#7). 
Why don't you explain your radical theory of how the NFC chip is used in remote transactions? I think you're confusing NFC with the secure element or other hardware-backed secure storage. NFC itself has no security value except for its limited range which makes it harder for a malicious actor to intercept the transmission between your phone and the point-of-sale system. Transactions over the internet have no such danger as the entire session is encrypted with HTTPS. All...
I still have no idea why you brought up NFC. The sole purpose of NFC is to wirelessly transmit your token to the merchant's receiver for an in person transaction. It's just a wireless communication protocol and provides no authentication. It has no use when buying things from a remote merchant; in particular, NFC plays no role in in-app purchases through Apple Pay.
New Posts  All Forums: