or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Mobile malware exploding, but only for Android
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Mobile malware exploding, but only for Android - Page 3

post #81 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by sflocal View Post

I think the iPhone gave non-iPhone users the false impression that all phones are safe.

 

May I correct your statement for you?

 

"I think Google gave non-iPhone users the false impression that all smart phones are iPhones."

post #82 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

 So no example then. Sounds almost made up if I didn't know you better.

Thats the pot calling the kettle black, eh sport?

iMac 2007, Macbook pro 2008, Mac Mini 2011
Reply
iMac 2007, Macbook pro 2008, Mac Mini 2011
Reply
post #83 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


What about enterprise iPhones? Weren't there fake enterprise accounts being open in China and pirated apps being installed on iPhones?

Good point, but the difference is that Apple will try to plug this "hole" while Google is willingly allowing random apps from the Web to be installed with a simple "allow sideloading" switch.

 

I'd like to see some Android enthusiast here complain that Google doesn't do enough to prevent Android from becoming a malware haven like Windows was. I'm sure those people exist, but it seems that pro Android posters here choose instead to blame the "stupid" users and/or try to minimize the problem.

 

 

Yes there will always be the possibility of malware but it doesn't have to be that bad. You can't tell me that Google can't improve things there.

post #84 of 123
The difference in security approaches is manifest by simply considering one simple "feature" of each product:

  • Samsung Galaxy S4 (released 21 days ago) already has root methods allowing the installation of custom ROMs, in fact, some root methods were released within days of the product release
  • Apple iPhone 5 required nearly six months to jailbreak

Anyone who thinks Google or Samsung take security seriously is seriously delusional.
Edited by MacBook Pro - 5/17/13 at 6:54am
post #85 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by VL-Tone View Post

Good point, but the difference is that Apple will try to plug this "hole" while Google is willingly allowing random apps from the Web to be installed with a simple "allow sideloading" switch.

I'd like to see some Android enthusiast here complain that Google doesn't do enough to prevent Android from becoming a malware haven like Windows was. I'm sure those people exist, but it seems that pro Android posters here choose instead to blame the "stupid" users and/or try to minimize the problem.



Yes there will always be the possibility of malware but it doesn't have to be that bad. You can't tell me that Google can't improve things there.

The occurrence relayed by the poster to whom you responded wasn't an exploit. The essence of the occurrence was as follows:

  • Chinese website offers an alternative App Store
  • Users must knowingly accept a digital certificate
  • Digital certificates are a form of identification that enables streamlined authentication, data integrity, and encryption
  • For example, a business enterprise or government agency may use a digital certificate to provide their own App Store to release in-house apps
  • Essentially, the Chinese website and the user are exploiting a security feature to install free apps
  • In some ways this is quite similar to "side loading" apps
  • The difference is that Apple iPhone users don't commonly promote exploitation of developers as a feature thus almost certainly limiting the impact of the Chinese website which will limit the possible distribution of exploit apps (assuming there are such on the Chinese website)
  • Furthermore, the limiting of hardware ports to a single proprietary "smart port" drastically limits the possibility of spreading exploits by swapping SD cards, etc.


  • Could the apps on the Chinese website offer exploits packaged as free replacements for popular apps? They absolutely could which is one possible reason Apple iPhone users aren't promoting the website constantly.
  • Is the Chinese website commonly offered as a "feature" of the Apple ecosystem? No!
  • Is the Apple App Store relatively secure? Yes! There have been few, in any, widespread exploits released in the Apple App Store.
  • Is Google Play relatively secure? No! While Google has improved their security and has removed apps there continue to be issues.
  • Is Google Play the only commonly accepted and promoted source of apps? No, which is a major issue with the security of Android. Many Android users believe that "side loading" and rooting are "features" of the platform when they are, in fact, simply exploits.

Edited by MacBook Pro - 5/17/13 at 7:14am
post #86 of 123
Originally Posted by SCProfessor View Post
…do you think the malware will hack my fridge and turn my meat rancid.

 

If it's this model, yes.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #87 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacBook Pro View Post

The difference in security approaches is manifest by simply considering one simple "feature" of each product:

  • Samsung Galaxy S4 (released 21 days ago) already has root methods allowing the installation of custom ROMs, in fact, some root methods were released within days of the product release
  • Apple iPhone 5 required nearly six months to jailbreak

Anyone who thinks Google or Samsung take security seriously is seriously delusional.

It's not that clear-cut MacBook. Not mentioned in the recent Symantec report that said most malware was targeting Android was another claim they made. 

 

93% of all newly discovered mobile OS vulnerabilities come from iOS, 387 of the total 415 in the Symantec report. 

http://www.symantec.com/security_response/publications/threatreport.jsp

 

In case you think Symantec's report must be wrong (and if so why would the Android malware claim be any more right), CVE, a highly respected and detailed security datasource, finds much the same with over 225 identified security flaws in iOS or more than 80% of the the total number across all mobile OS's

http://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-49/product_id-15556/Apple-Iphone-Os.html

What about Android? Fewer than 30. Windows mobile OS must have a lot right? Nope only 14 at last count, and Blackberry is best of all with only 11 identified exploitable OS flaws according to CVE.

 

But that doesn't seem to make any sense. If Apple's iOS has had the highest number of security flaws of all the major mobile OS's, why is Android getting the most attention from cyber bad-guys? Experts say (and I agree) it's because Google had been lax about policing apps and the "user experience", and that makes complete sense. One of the supposed attractions of Android is how easy it is to customize and Google has encouraged users to do what they want with their smart-devices. Don't like the skin? Download a new one. The latest OS not yet available for your Android smartphone? No prob, just download an app that gives your the same functionality, more or less.

 

It's not that Android has more OS vulnerabilities than iOS as you would suggest. Far from it. But Apple's more heavily curated approach to apps and the stronger control they exert on their platform and those who play in their backyard makes Android users the easier and more profitable target. At some point Google may need to move closer to Apple's approach and take a little more control of the platform than they have so far. "At some point" may not be all that far off either.

 

It's also clear that Google's control over their own app store has improved a whole lot over the past couple of years. Nefarious apps within Google Play are exceptionally uncommon, perhaps now nearly as rare as finding one in Apple's app store. I haven't seen anything that would dispute that. But with lots of other sources for Android compatible apps and users in less-developed countries perhaps more likely to look for "free" versions of official Google Play paid apps they end up being targets for very expensive (and highly profitable) SMS texts, the most commonly mentioned scam. At least Google recognized that and took action with Jellybean, which now will flag a warning and ask for permission before your smartphone will send that expensive SMS.

 

In any event, it's not the number of exploitable security flaws in Android or iOS that attracts the bad guys. It comes down to those apps and where a user can get 'em IMO.


Edited by Gatorguy - 5/17/13 at 8:16am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #88 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

If it's this model, yes.

Interesting that there is no concern for personally identifiable information, credit card data, etc. Possibly more evidence that Android users don't actually use their "smartphones" they spend so much effort to customize.

If he is truly concerned about rancid meat vulnerabilities he could peruse the NIST National Vulnerability Database which lists 348 vulnerabilities for Google Android.
post #89 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacBook Pro View Post


Interesting that there is no concern for personally identifiable information, credit card data, etc. Possibly more evidence that Android users don't actually use their "smartphones" they spend so much effort to customize.

If he is truly concerned about rancid meat vulnerabilities he could peruse the NIST National Vulnerability Database which lists 348 vulnerabilities for Google Android.

If you meant to restrict your list to Google Android specific vulnerabilities as you said you instead would have found this: (your flawed search included cross platform FLASH, Java etc that also affected Windows, iOS, Macs and others):

http://web.nvd.nist.gov/view/vuln/search-results?query=Google+Android&search_type=all&cves=on

Total count: 29

 

The same search for Apple iOS is here:

http://web.nvd.nist.gov/view/vuln/search-results?query=Apple+iOS&search_type=all&cves=on

Total count: 185

 

I assume you weren't intentionally being misleading MacBook Pro. You were just a little sloppy with the research.

 

EDIT: For someone who claims to have me on "ignore" and not reading my posts it's odd that you respond to the exact same points I bring up if I correct a post of yours. I don't mind having an honest debate if we disagree (and sometimes we do agree!) but you'd have to drop the charade that you don't have any idea what I write.1wink.gif


Edited by Gatorguy - 5/17/13 at 8:51am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #90 of 123

Ooohh, this is new. Mac malware signed with a real Apple ID? Tricky as that would bypass the security controls in Mountain Lion meant to prevent just such an occurance.

http://arstechnica.com/security/2013/05/mac-malware-signed-with-apple-id-infects-activists-laptop/

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #91 of 123
Quote:
Anyone who thinks Google or Samsung take security seriously is seriously delusional.

 

I agree, Google and Samsung care about security about as much as Apple does on OSX. In other words, not at all - remember Flashback? Apple didn't release the patch for OSX for months and months after it was released by Oracle.

post #92 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by tabinnorway View Post

 

I agree, Google and Samsung care about security about as much as Apple does on OSX. In other words, not at all - remember Flashback? Apple didn't release the patch for OSX for months and months after it was released by Oracle.

You'd think that for a first post, someone might refrain from abject trolling.

Where are we on the curve? We'll know once it goes asymptotic!
Reply
Where are we on the curve? We'll know once it goes asymptotic!
Reply
post #93 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by SixnaHalfFeet View Post

 

May I correct your statement for you?

 

"I think Google gave non-iPhone users the false impression that all smart phones are iPhones."

 

With freedom comes responsibility (note, in my house there is an iPhone, two iPads, a Samsung Galaxy SIII and a Nokia Lumia 920 - the Galaxy hasn't even been charged since Christmas I think).

Android gives you freedom, but that means you have to behave responsibly. Not everybody does (or can). It's a trade off, and I am not willing to say one is absolutely wrong and the other absolutely right. They are different and serve different purposes. A walled garden is for those who can't or won't take responsibility for what happens on their phone sys admin style. For most people, that might be OK. It's a phone, why treat it like a computer, right? For others, the ability to do what you want is more important.

 

Apparently Ben Franklin is to have said something similar to: "People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both." In principle I do agree with Ben here, there can be no doubt that the Apple view of a Walled Garden for all to play in is one of the most dangerous threats to computer freedom today. That and the "You're the product we're selling" attitudes of Google and Facebook.

The weird thing is that the current behavior or Apple (All your base are belong to us) and Google/Facebook (we'll sell you, your soul, your children and whatever else we can get our hands on to the highest bidder) makes Microsoft look like the Good Guys (TM).

post #94 of 123
Originally Posted by tabinnorway View Post

The weird thing is that the current behavior or Apple (All your base are belong to us) and Google/Facebook (we'll sell you, your soul, your children and whatever else we can get our hands on to the highest bidder) makes Microsoft look like the Good Guys (TM).

 

Microsoft, who has a garden with even higher walls and thicker gates. 1oyvey.gif

 

Look, Ballmer, either go find a Windows forum or get back to dancing.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #95 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by IQatEdo View Post

You'd think that for a first post, someone might refrain from abject trolling.

You'd expect that for someone replying, there would be actual content in the reply. Apple actually has a long history of being far too late with security updates. This is a matter of history, no matter what your particular religious beliefs about your computer equipment says.
post #96 of 123
Originally Posted by tabinnorway View Post
I didn't actually make a statement that requires enlightenment.

 

'Course not. Except for the part where you don't disprove what I've said yet try to claim I'm wrong.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #97 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

'Course not. Except for the part where you don't disprove what I've said yet try to claim I'm wrong.

Sigh. So you want me to prove a negative? You are actually asking me to prove that Microsoft doesn't have higher walls than Apple? The statement that needs "proof" is the positive statement, in fact, it is the only one where supplying proof is possible. The "no, it is not so" neither needs proof, nor can it have it. Proving a negative is not possible. Asking for proof that something "isn't" is therefore rather idiotic. Please, I am not saying that you are an idiot, just that your request is idiotic.

 

So, the only baseless statement currently is (stated more formally) "Microsoft's walled garden is more restrictive than Apple's walled garden". The question then becomes "How so?"

post #98 of 123
Originally Posted by tabinnorway View Post
So you want me to prove a negative? You are actually asking me to prove that Microsoft doesn't have higher walls than Apple?

 

Yep. It's easy for anyone who actually has an argument to support it. Reword the effing question if it's so "difficult" for you to comprehend: How is Microsoft more open than Apple?

 

Simple. Answer it or don't.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #99 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

Yep. It's easy for anyone who actually has an argument to support it. Reword the effing question if it's so "difficult" for you to comprehend: How is Microsoft more open than Apple?

 

Simple. Answer it or don't.

 

Looks like my answer to this one has been removed by someone, so I'll try to answer it, perhaps a little more politely. Here it is: I have never stated that Microsoft is more open than Apple. Why do you think I have said that?

 

Let me try an analogy for you. Mr Smith says: Mr Jones is a theif. Mr Jones answers "no I am not". Mr Smith then says: "Prove it". Sadly, in the universe we live, Mr Jones can not. It isn't possible to prove that you are not a thief (in other words, to prove a negative). You are demanding Mr Jones proves he is not a thief, that's absurd. I'll repeat it, I have ONLY said that Microsoft is NOT more closed than Apple, I have not said whether that means that Microsoft is more open than Apple or whether that means that they are equally closed.

 

There is only ONE positive statement made in this debate, and that is yours, and you are the only one who could possibly have any proof, since - as I might have mentioned, you cannot prove a negative.

post #100 of 123
Originally Posted by tabinnorway View Post

There is only ONE positive statement made in this debate, and that is yours, and you are the only one who could possibly have any proof, since - as I might have mentioned, you cannot prove a negative.

 

Since you refuse to comprehend what you're even talking about, we're done here. I'm not wasting my time with someone who moves the goalposts and then drapes a giant cloth over where the goalpost used to be and claims that it can't be proven the goalpost has moved… when you can see it right behind the cloth.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #101 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by tabinnorway View Post

...as I might have mentioned, you cannot prove a negative.

That's not correct. You can't always prove a negative but it's possible to show that an outcome is negative. 2 - 5 = -3 is one of an infinite number of examples that you can prove a negative. What you're talking about is the Evidence of Absence logical fallacy in which one is unable to show an affirmation of negation which means that the opposite is therefore true.

As for your other comments about who is more closed or open, i don't get your logic. You haven't detailed any criteria to what is open or closed but you've stated (not proved) that MS is not more closed than Apple but you don't think that means they must be more open than Apple, yet fail to detail how they must be exactly the same which is the only other option between the common binary options of more and less.

Based on the number of open source software Apple supports directly in their OS compared to MS once can say Apple is more open than MS. Based on the fact Apple's core OS (Darwin) and kernel are open source and MS Windows has no such offering one can say that Apple is more open. Both of these specific statements imply that MS is therefore more closed.


Edited by SolipsismX - 6/7/13 at 8:09am

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #102 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by os2baba View Post

I have now been using Android for 5 years. And I have no malware on my phone. Yes, I check the permissions before installing, and if I find anything suspicious, I don't install the app. Not really all that difficult. I also side load a lot of apps, but only from trusted sources. eg. I side loaded Swype while it was being beta tested. I side load adaway now that Google has decided to be evil about it. Most of this "research" is conducted by snake oil security firms. And every once in a while, I download them, run their scans, find no malware and promptly delete them. Here are a couple of screen shots of recent scans.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/3yprz32jjmywku2/Screenshot_2013-04-22-01-38-00.png
https://www.dropbox.com/s/uh07uhnpzff1ww7/Screenshot_2013-04-22-01-50-02.png
Don't get me wrong. There are plenty of real dangers. But it's really not that difficult to prevent getting a single malware on your phone. And as far as iOS apps are concerned. How do you know they are safe? The reason that malware is discovered on Android is precisely because the OS is open.
A while ago, the Camera+ app which used the Volume buttons for taking snaps was rejected from the AppStore *after* it was approved. How did it get the hidden feature through the approval process? It was discovered and rejected because it violated AppStore policies. How do you know how much malware has made through and not been discovered?
Charlie Miller snuck in a prototype malware program into the App Store. Apple did not discover it until he publicly announced it and got the app rejected. How do you know hoe much malware there really is floating around in the App Store?
Give me the choice of checking the permissions any day. I let Google's Bouncer do the grunt work, but still search myself. Likewise Apple may well be getting *most* of the malware out, but if something slips through, there is no second line of defense.

I second what you said, good post. I'm also tired of this Malware talk, I'm yet to have gotten one as well. Only use top tier apps from both sides of the pond and you'll be just fine.
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
post #103 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

If it's this model, yes.

First the system isn't Android it's a custom embedded Linux, second MY LAMB CHOPS!!!!

This is what you want though;



Yes that is a iPad, the new Whirpool Centralpark, ooooohhhhh Mommy want's.
Edited by Relic - 6/7/13 at 8:36am
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
post #104 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Based on the fact Apple's core OS (Darwin) and kernel are open source and MS Windows has no such offering one can say that Apple is more open.

Yes definitely, Darwin is based upon open source software, unfortunately though Apple has closed down OpenDarwin and it's collaborative community. Which meant no more new builds after Darwin 9 (OSX 10.6). Developers can still submit fixes they believe to be be bugs but it is at Apple's discretion if anything happens with it. Before 2006 it was possible to monitor your bugs status that would ultimately end up in a OSX build. So you can say that their OS is now closed, were as before it was just the Aqua desktop that was closed. There is another project called PureDarwin that uses the older Darwin 9 but the last time I played with it I found it to be PureCrap. Those who are interested in a BSD OS would be better served by using FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD and my personal favorite PC-BSD, which is based off of FreeBSD but comes with all the goodies preinstalled.

http://darwinbuild.macosforge.org/
http://www.puredarwin.org/
Edited by Relic - 6/7/13 at 9:23am
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
post #105 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

I'm not wasting my time with someone who moves the goalposts ...

 

Goodness. I have not changed anything at all about anything I have said in this discussion. I have stated one thing, and one thing only, and that is that the claim that Apples walled garden is more open than Microsoft's walled garden is wrong. Nothing changed at all.

 

Sadly, you spout religious nonsense and refuse to back it up with facts or documentation. That is just sad, and I actually pity you. Get well.

post #106 of 123
Originally Posted by tabinnorway View Post
I have not changed anything at all about anything I have said in this discussion.

 

Of course not.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #107 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

As for your other comments about who is more closed or open, i don't get your logic. You haven't detailed any criteria to what is open or closed 

 

You are absolutely correct in that I have not detailed any criteria for what is open an what is closed. I have only stated that a statement claiming that Microsoft is more closed than Apple is unsubstantiated. There are more than two (of the ones I listed for the simpleton who have been hounding me to prove a negative - see  articles referred at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proving_a_negative) possible reasons.

 

  1. Microsoft is more open than Apple
  2. Microsoft is equally open to Apple
  3. The statement is nonsensical and determining openness is impossible or highly subjective, the original statement then is absurd

 

For many reasons, see for example "Unfair Burden" in the article referred above, it is the job of the person making the positive statement to supply proof. Anything else is both unreasonable and quite illogical. Russel's tea pot is a good example. I refer to the example I used above:

 

Mr Jones: Mr Smith is a thief

Mr Smith: No I am not

Mr Jones: Prove it

 

Nobody in their right mind would demand that Mr Smith provides such a proof. Here is what has happened in this thread:

 

Statement: Microsoft is more closed than Apple

Negation: No it is not

Tallest Skil: Prove it

 

Why would the burden of proof fall on the "No it is not" in the second case?

post #108 of 123
Originally Posted by tabinnorway View Post
You are absolutely correct in that I have not detailed any criteria for what is open an what is closed.

 

So instead of wasting everyone's time with a pointless outline, how about doing that?

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #109 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by tabinnorway View Post

You are absolutely correct in that I have not detailed any criteria for what is open an what is closed. I have only stated that a statement claiming that Microsoft is more closed than Apple is unsubstantiated. There are more than two (of the ones I listed for the simpleton who have been hounding me to prove a negative - see  articles referred at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proving_a_negative
) possible reasons.
  1. Microsoft is more open than Apple
  2. Microsoft is equally open to Apple
  3. The statement is nonsensical and determining openness is impossible or highly subjective, the original statement then is absurd

For many reasons, see for example "Unfair Burden" in the article referred above, it is the job of the person making the positive statement to supply proof. Anything else is both unreasonable and quite illogical. Russel's tea pot is a good example. I refer to the example I used above:

Mr Jones: Mr Smith is a thief
Mr Smith: No I am not
Mr Jones: Prove it

Nobody in their right mind would demand that Mr Smith provides such a proof. Here is what has happened in this thread:

Statement: Microsoft is more closed than Apple
Negation: No it is not
Tallest Skil: Prove it

Why would the burden of proof fall on the "No it is not" in the second case?

Why do I feel like I just sat threw a freshmen ethics course on acid, I need to lie down my head hurts.
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
post #110 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

Of course not.

 

Could you point out one, or are you just a habitual liar?

post #111 of 123
Originally Posted by tabinnorway View Post
Could you point out one, or are you just a habitual liar?

 

How about you get back to answering the actual questions first.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #112 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic View Post


Why do I feel like I just sat threw a freshmen ethics course on acid, I need to lie down my head hurts.

 

Oh, I am sorry, I didn't mean to make it a college-level post. It was more intended for the kindergarden level, since that was the intellect I had to assume Tallest Skil was able to understand. He apparently doesn't understand the difference between "is not taller than" and "is much shorter than". Basic English appears to be above his skill level, so that is where I had to try to communicate.

 

Someone past kindergarden level usually understands the difference, and most also understand where the burden of proof lies. With the person making an accusation. But hey, if that is freshmen level, I have misunderstood the quality of the US education system.

post #113 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

How about you get back to answering the actual questions first.

 

What question? Are you seriously asking me to prove something I have never stated? I have never stated that Microsoft is more open than Apple, you do realize this right? What particular question do you want me to answer? Also, why don't you provide proof for your statement that Microsoft is more closed than Apple? You never have.

post #114 of 123
Originally Posted by tabinnorway View Post
What question? Are you seriously asking me to prove something I have never stated? I have never stated that Microsoft is more open than Apple, you do realize this right? What particular question do you want me to answer? Also, why don't you provide proof for your statement that Microsoft is more closed than Apple? You never have.

 

So insults, lies, and then refusing to prove what you explicitly said. That's nice. Later, skater.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #115 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Based on the number of open source software Apple supports directly in their OS compared to MS once can say Apple is more open than MS. Based on the fact Apple's core OS (Darwin) and kernel are open source and MS Windows has no such offering one can say that Apple is more open. Both of these specific statements imply that MS is therefore more closed.

 

Please, read the final part of this post carefully.

 

BTW, sorry about not answering the latter part of your post here. I originally didn't find it relevant but apparently Tallest Skil wants me to answer this. Now, parts of it has already been answered by Relic, OSX can not be considered OpenSource, and in actuality, Apples contribution to OpenSource is quite scarce compared to what it gets - http://news.cnet.com/8301-13505_3-9992358-16.html. Heck, you can just go out and try to develop an iOS application without owning a Mac and see how easy it is (yes, it can be done, I've done it using PhoneGap build).

 

I am not sure how using, but not contributing at a similar level, can be considered open.

 

You also pointed to the Microsoft site for open source, but did you actually read what was there? If you did, I am not quite sure how you could say that Microsoft doesn't contribute. Ajax is built on Microsoft ideas and technologies, first available in IE. Microsoft fully embraces jQuery and jQuery UI as web standards, and contributes significantly (particularly to validation lately). Almost all Microsoft efforts in the Web 2.0 space at the moment are Open Source, and more are being added by the day. ASP.NET MVC is fully FOSS. Windows Commuication Foundation. Most of ASP. Significant PHP contributions (particularly in compilation etc), F#, Python, Java, Ruby etc. Azure fully supports Linux, and of course runs the iCloud, Web 2.0 security, SOAP security, SOAP is a Microsoft Technology, PhoneGap...

 

Currently I am using Visual Studio 2012 to develop an app that will be deployed on Android and iOS (no Windows deployment currently planned). Please let me know when I can use any Apple tool to build anything for Windows...

 

Oh, and finally, this was about the walled gardens of Microsoft and Apple, in other words, iOS. What is open about iOS other than the fact that it runs on BSD in the bottom. The fact that Apple didn't (couldn't) write the OS from scratch and had to hitch-hike on FOSS, doesn't make them open. What makes a company open as it related to FOSS is what it contributes, not what it uses, and how what it delivers is FOSS. OSX and iOS? They are FOSS in the same way that Windows 8 is VAX VMS.

post #116 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

So insults, lies, and then refusing to prove what you explicitly said. That's nice. Later, skater.

 

Do you own a mirror? If not, you should buy one. You stated something that you have never backed up. The only thing you have delivered since are rather odd requests for me to prove something I have never stated, and insults. Next time you make a statement, please try to back it up with facts. Oh, and please point to a single lie. I have delievered none. The only liar so far is you.

post #117 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

So instead of wasting everyone's time with a pointless outline, how about doing that?

 

Did you even read the post that you quoted? I did explain it there. With mostly short words. Look at the part that says 1... 2... 3...

 

Know what, I'll repeat it here for you: "The statement is nonsensical and determining openness is impossible or highly subjective, the original statement then is absurd". Was there anything in there you did not understand?

post #118 of 123
Originally Posted by tabinnorway View Post
I am not sure how using, but not contributing at a similar level, can be considered open.

 

The fact that Apple didn't (couldn't) write the OS from scratch…

 

And you honestly wonder why I refuse to entertain your delusions.

 

I'm certain you're someone back again at this point. There's just nothing else it could be.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #119 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

And you honestly wonder why I refuse to entertain your delusions.

 

I'm certain you're someone back again at this point. There's just nothing else it could be.

 

The "couldn't" was an attempt at being humorous, it might have failed. But they didn't. OSX core is BSD. Still see no documentation from you on anything, so a liar you are.

post #120 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by tabinnorway View Post

I agree, Google and Samsung care about security about as much as Apple does on OSX. In other words, not at all - remember Flashback? Apple didn't release the patch for OSX for months and months after it was released by Oracle.

No, I don't remember flashback, then again I didn't go out of my way to install Java on my MacBook and left things at their default.
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Mobile malware exploding, but only for Android