or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Editorial: Google's Android haunted by Steve Jobs' warnings on app signing security
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Editorial: Google's Android haunted by Steve Jobs' warnings on app signing security

post #1 of 180
Thread Starter 
In May 2007, I interviewed Steve Jobs on the subject of native apps for the iPhone months before the new phone first went on sale. Six years later, his answers are now haunting Google's rival Android platform because the search giant has failed to heed the advice leaking from the top of Apple's ship.

Jobs 3


Apps on the original iPhone OS



Apple had just demonstrated the brand new iPhone earlier that January, showing off a series of new "desktop class" mobile apps designed for it including a mobile multitouch Safari, Mail, Maps and iPod. But Jobs had also stated that third party developers would be able to build their own apps, albeit using web standards (HTML and JavaScript).

Incidentally, these custom web apps (two examples, below) are the same sort of "software" that Palm's webOS ran, and that Google's ChromeOS runs, and what many Windows Metro WP8/Windows 8 tablet apps are, all of which were introduced years after the iPhone and its initial web apps model for third party software were announced in 2007.

iPhone3G


Apple's web apps plan essentially relegated third party apps to exist on the level of Dashboard widgets, something that Apple's developer community vociferously rejected. They insisted Apple should give them access to develop native iPhone apps, enabling them to create software as speedy, sophisticated and powerful as the apps Apple had developed for the iPhone's Home screen.

For the next year, Apple didn't offer a mechanism to support the sale or distribution third party native apps on the iPhone (or iPod touch). In early 2008 however, Apple unveiled its new App Store along with iPhone OS 2.0 (later renamed iOS 2.0), opening the floodgates for what would become the largest and fastest growing software platform and market in history.

The story of Apple opposing native apps



Certain parties have since rewritten the history of the App Store to tell a very different story: one where Steve Jobs was opposed to the very idea of native apps. This version of events maintains that Apple didn't have any plans for an App Store until the jailbreak community (and perhaps some early Android hobbyists) demonstrated how great apps could be, forcing Apple to reluctantly open its own app store in response.

As a headline in the Los Angeles Times last week stated, "If Steve Jobs had his way, we wouldn't be celebrating the Apple App Store's 5th anniversary!"

The story insists that Jobs' Apple was wildly opposed to native apps and "tried its best to put a stop to" native apps being developed by jailbreak users, up until October 2007 when "Apple announced it would relent and create a way for people to write apps for the phone," something it finally outlined the following March and delivered that summer.

App Store
r

The truth in between



It is true that Apple initially outlined plans for web-based apps, and that it opposed jailbreaking (that is, defeating the security model of the phone to "break open" full access to its core software). It's also true that the App Store was far more wildly successful than anyone at Apple had anticipated.

However, Jobs didn't set out to simply stop native iPhone development out of ignorance of its potential. I know that because I asked Jobs about it at the company's 2007 shareholder meeting, amplified at the microphone in front of the assembled news media tasked with covering the event.

When I asked "does Apple recognize the needs of large, institutional buyers who are excited about the prospect of applying low cost, handheld computers with their own custom development?" Jobs clearly replied that Apple was aware of the demands of third party developers, but that the company was also still working on how to balance the needs for secure software and deployment. It was a work in progress.

I didn't see Jobs' answer reported by anyone in the news media. Instead, Ellen Lee of the San Francisco Chronicle published a story that invented a parallel universe where Jobs was "feisty" and constantly "firing back" at questions, while Troy Wolverton of the San Jose Mercury News similarly tried to focus dramatic attention on supposed "shareholder discontent" related to stock option backdating that had ended years prior.

Some members of the media did manage to repeat Jobs' quip about engineering work in general: "I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would have great products." That was awfully close to being the same message.

Full contempt and derision for every Apple decision



The journalists in attendance weren't the only ones to fail to grasp what Jobs was really saying. Vocal critics of 2007 also took issue with Apple's lack of support for applets based on Sun's Java, Qualcomm's BREW, and Adobe's Flash platforms on the original iPhone (Flash being an issue that raged another five years).

ABI Research analyst Phillip Solis felt moved to publish a note saying, "we must conclude at this point that, based on our current definition, the iPhone is not a smartphone, but rather a high-end feature phone," all because Apple hadn't opened a third party software market like Palm and Microsoft.

Add up the historical recommendations and demands of third party developers, pundits and industry analysts, and you get a community-designed platform that looks a lot like Android: one that downloads executable software from any source, supports various middleware platforms like Flash, lets users manually manage how the system launches and terminates background apps, and does away with all DRM restraints to make sure end users can promiscuously share files and apps as freely as they desire.

The problem is: that committee design has failed to make Android a good platform for either users or for developers. By not making any hard choices and giving people what they said they wanted, Google simply abandoned the future to cling tenaciously to the past.w

Rather than conceptualizing and engineering really new solutions to historical computing problems as Apple did with iOS, Google has only attempted to wrest control away from iOS via volume shipments and has effectively sent mobile computing back in time into the 1990s, resulting in the same malware, spyware, viruses and usability issues of Windows.

Malware


However, things on Android are worse than Windows ever was because unlike the conventional 1990s PC, today's modern mobile devices have GPS tracking features, socially connected accounts that link together individuals' private information, always-on mobile network connections linked to a billable mobile phone/SMS account or credit card, camera and audio recording features paired with private photo albums and logs of sensitive communication records, the potential to serve as both a user's primary media player and computing device, all while being a small device powered by preciously finite battery capacity.

It's as if Google entered the auto business but declined to incorporate seat belts and airbags because it never noticed a need for such features when it was riding trains around in the previous century.

How Apple addressed the terrible mobile apps market



In quite stark contrast to Google, Apple surveyed the rather miserable mobile landscape that existed prior to the iPhone before setting out to build its own alternative mobile platform, taking note of what the problems were and how they could be effectively solved.

As I documented in early 2007, it was a world where a simple game like Texas Holdem cost $20 on Palm OS or cost $3 per month on a BREW subscription billed to your feature phone by Verizon Wireless. The Palm OS version of Bejeweled cost $20 and a "Pocket Tunes" MP3 player demanded $37.


2007 Texas Holdem $20 for Palm, $5 for iPod, or $3/month on Verizon BREW


It was world where Windows Mobile users were expected to shell out $75 for WorldMate Pro, a world clock app with access to weather forecasts and flight information. WiMo users also needed to pay $20 for a real email application, $30 to manage your contacts, $15 to view photos, $20 to play MP3s, $30 for a calculator, $25 to read PDFs, $30 to take notes, and $25 to find and launch apps with Propel, an app billed as "the ultimate launcher - you'll be amazed at how snappy and straightforward launching applications, finding contacts and keeping in touch will be!"

These were actually some of the top popular apps in Microsoft's Windows Mobile Marketplace. Apple incorporated all of these "third party apps" for free on the iPhone, along with a mobile browser that actually worked and with a custom designed app providing a slick interface for Google Maps that was far better than anything Google had delivered for a mobile phone.

These prices seem really high in retrospect, but they were set high for good reason: most mobile apps were being wildly pirated, so developers had to charge enough so that the minority who did pay were subsidizing this sieve of a market. Apple took note.

While the populist retelling of history suggests that Apple suddenly figured this all out in 2008 at the iPhone's first anniversary (after being schooled by jailbreaking hackers of the utility of software), the reality was that it took some time to develop a secure SDK and app deployment model to accommodate third party development.

This didn't all happen between Apple's announcement in October 2007 and its public release the next summer. We know this because Apple was shipping the beginnings of the App Store business model in the fall of 2006, a year before the iPhone.

Sell hardware, open apps market



In the fall of 2006, Apple launched a series of $4.99 iPod games as a new feature for the 5G iPod. The new iTunes games store opened a year after Apple had first released the 5G iPod. That ensured that there were millions of customers in place ready to buy games once the new titles hit the iTunes Store.

New iPod


This is, of course, the exact same thing Apple did with the iPhone in 2008. It perfectly solved the historical catch-22 facing new platforms: why would developers make software for a platform that doesn't yet exist and has no users, and why would end users buy into a new platform for which there is little or no new software?

The iPod games of 2006 were clearly not a huge business initiative for Apple. It was a learning experience. The company was experimenting with how to deploy DRM-secured software in a way that benefitted users (the games were good quality, worked well and cost very little) and developers (there would be little piracy, so they could still make money despite charging very little per game).

Jobs explained the key to marketing mobile software



Given that Apple had very publicly launched iPod games in 2006, it was somewhat curious that the world remained completely baffled at why Apple didn't just throw open the iPhone to third party development from day one. Even more baffling is the expectation that Apple would welcome Java or Flash software on its platform, given that all of the mobile software available for either was extremely low quality junkware."We?re trying to do two diametrically opposed things at once?provide an advanced and open platform to developers while at the same time protect iPhone users from viruses, malware, privacy attacks."

However, Jobs continued to explain in public what Apple was doing. A few months after I posed my own custom app development question in May, Jobs further explained the iPhone app situation on stage at the Wall Street Journal "All Things Digital" conference, describing the App Store engineering task as a "wrestling" between security on one hand and an open platform for apps on the other.

Several months later in October, Jobs came out with one of his rare public blog entries where he stated, "Let me just say it: We want native third party applications on the iPhone, and we plan to have an SDK in developers? hands in February. We are excited about creating a vibrant third party developer community around the iPhone and enabling hundreds of new applications for our users. With our revolutionary multi-touch interface, powerful hardware and advanced software architecture, we believe we have created the best mobile platform ever for developers."

Jobs' next comments, in retrospect, sound eerily prophetic: "It will take until February to release an SDK because we?re trying to do two diametrically opposed things at once?provide an advanced and open platform to developers while at the same time protect iPhone users from viruses, malware, privacy attacks, etc. This is no easy task. Some claim that viruses and malware are not a problem on mobile phones?this is simply not true. There have been serious viruses on other mobile phones already, including some that silently spread from phone to phone over the cell network. As our phones become more powerful, these malicious programs will become more dangerous. And since the iPhone is the most advanced phone ever, it will be a highly visible target."

Google has ignored Jobs' warnings at its own peril, but Jobs didn't arrogantly speak of secure mobile software development as an idea Apple had come up with independently. He credited Nokia.

"Some companies are already taking action," Jobs wrote. "Nokia, for example, is not allowing any applications to be loaded onto some of their newest phones unless they have a digital signature that can be traced back to a known developer. While this makes such a phone less than 'totally open,' we believe it is a step in the right direction. We are working on an advanced system which will offer developers broad access to natively program the iPhone?s amazing software platform while at the same time protecting users from malicious programs.

"We think a few months of patience now will be rewarded by many years of great third party applications running on safe and reliable iPhones," he concluded, before adding, "P.S.: The SDK will also allow developers to create applications for iPod touch."

Anyone who thinks Apple waited around until October 2007 to start work on the iPhone 2.0 SDK because the company needed to be prodded into action by the jailbreak community simply does not understand how engineering projects work.

Why Android doesn't have great apps



Apple wasn't just looking at the mobile mistakes of Palm and Microsoft, but was also taking note of some of the smart moves occurring at other companies. That included Nokia's app signing (preceded by video games vendors) and Microsoft's Exchange push messaging architecture (which took cues from Blackberry).

While Google was asking the community to replicate a license-free version of Sun's Java on Linux to serve as its ad-optimized mobile platform, Apple was actually engineering a new platform that learned from both the best practices of the industry's leaders as well as their mistakes. It's not surprising why Apple's App Store succeeded and Google Play hasn't; Apple did the work Google failed to do.

At the 2008 release of the App Store, Apple not only launched its iPhone SDK with app signing, but it also launched push messaging based on Exchange ActiveSync, and outlined plans to leverage push notifications to save battery life on mobile devices.

Windows Mobile Task Manager


Apple has since brought both concepts to the Mac desktop too, introducing signed apps in the Mac App Store and incorporating push notifications for apps and, in OS X Mavericks, even web sites.

Google sort of followed suit on app signing, but enabled developers to self-sign their own apps. This "opened" Android's software model, but at the expense of Google exercising any real control over the real identity of apps. While it's possible to crack and steal iOS apps, it is more difficult than on Android.

It's also significantly more difficult to crack, hack and resell stolen iOS apps as your own work. Because Apple runs the only App Store for iOS, it can (and does) stop such activity. One recent issue was resolved by Apple the day after it was reported.

Google has no power to stop rogue developers from stealing legitimate Android apps, putting their own name on it and reselling it as their own work. This is routinely done for easy money, but it is also done to distribute malware and spyware.

This has resulted in Android harboring more than 90 percent of all mobile malware, but more importantly, it has had a very chilling effect on third party developer investment in the Android platform. Why bother to create innovative apps for Android if they can be stolen and resold on any number of third party stores? And why align with a platform that pays no heed to copyright abuses?

It's not the store, it's how you run it



While Google has invested some efforts in trying to catch up with Apple's App Store, it's clear Google's main priority has been to deploy a huge volume of Android devices with the assumption that this will automatically stoke demand for Android software.

There's a number of problems that are keeping this strategy from working. One is simply an issue of quality, evidenced in the security flaw discovered by Bluebox Security that defeats Android's app signing model across the entire installed base.

Android security flaw


This issue is aggravated by Android's fragmentation, as it would require expensive efforts to create and test updates to patch the hundreds of millions of different Android phones out there with this flaw.

Given that Android licensees can't be bothered to roll out other security patches or even Google's latest Android version across the vast majority of their active installed base of users (Duo Security noted that more than half of Android devices are vulnerable to at least one of the known Android security flaws), there's no basis for believing that they'll bother to roll out this particular app signing patch.

Google hasn't even rolled out patches for its own Nexus devices yet.

But even if this issue magically vanished, the problem remains that Google hasn't copied Apple's security and curation work that has made the App Store successful. Retroactively addressing security on your platform isn't easy. Just ask Microsoft.

Many cooks in the Android kitchen



Android also faces many of the same "too many cooks" problems Microsoft deals with on Windows (and Windows Phone).

When Google and Samsung partnered on the Galaxy Nexus, the incorrect signing key was used to sign apps on devices in the German market, so that when users logged into Google Play, they got weird errors trying to update their phones and Google's apps wouldn't update property.

A problem with Android? With Google because it's a "Nexus?" Or because it's Google Play? Or because it's Google's apps? Or with Samsung, the manufacturer? Finding out which it is is an exercise for the buyer. In iOS land, everything is simply Apple's fault, and Apple takes care of it.

What it really boils down to is that Apple "wrestles" with such issues before deploying its products. The layers of key signing problems Google has struggled on Android have been after the fact, the result of not giving enough thought to privacy, security and accountability while developing its products.
post #2 of 180
There's a lot of Apple news in this story, I enjoyed it.
If you don't like editorials, stick to reading news? They are clearly labelled in the title.
post #3 of 180
Great Article!
post #4 of 180
God this site spends way too much time talking about Google. 1oyvey.gif
post #5 of 180
It's comparative research. That it came off as "Android hate" is a byproduct of the ugly truth.
"Picasso had a saying, 'Good artists copy, great artists steal.' And we've always been shameless about stealing great ideas."
Reply
"Picasso had a saying, 'Good artists copy, great artists steal.' And we've always been shameless about stealing great ideas."
Reply
post #6 of 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by iOSx View Post

Can we get more Apple news, and less Android hate?

No. Nice try*, though.

*You'd better be kidding yourself if you actually think I think that was a nice try.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #7 of 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by iOSx View Post

Can we get more Apple news, and less Android hate?


If the cold, dark reality scares you, then scurry back to the corner of the room Mr. One-post drive-by.

DED is not wasting his time with "hate" stuff as you put it.  He is simply writing - very clearly - the advantages of iOS, the real truth that went on when Jobs unveiled the iPhone, and the botched, half-a$$ system that Android is.

I remember the iPhone being introduced back in 2007 and I knew mobile would never be the same.  I also remember what really happened back then and all the propaganda being put out by iHaters, and the clueless media as they attempt to rewrite history and making it sound like the iPhone really wasn't a big deal.

post #8 of 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by iOSx View Post

Can we get more Apple news, and less Android hate?

I agree with that... The article contains some really good information, but I cannot read through all of the rants. These editorials could be really good, but the way the content is delivered is terrible. Please stop with the bad analogies while you are at it.
post #9 of 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phone-UI-Guy View Post

I agree with that... The article contains some really good information, but I cannot read through all of the rants. These editorials could be really good, but the way the content is delivered is terrible. Please stop with the bad analogies while you are at it.

That's like saying, "why can't we have a book about the history of allied forces' actions during WWII without it mentioning the Germans, Japanese or Italians?"
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #10 of 180
This seems more interesting to me: Apple hires fresh talent for ‘iWatch’

If Apple's just now hiring for wearable tech projects then we're not seeing anything from them in 2013, and probably not until mid-late 2014.
post #11 of 180
I remember now after reading this excellent weekend post by DED, but I had totally forgotten about the delay in allowing native apps by 3rd party developers for iOS. How times flies!
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #12 of 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phone-UI-Guy View Post

I agree with that... The article contains some really good information, but I cannot read through all of the rants. These editorials could be really good, but the way the content is delivered is terrible. Please stop with the bad analogies while you are at it.

That's like saying, "why can't we have a book about the history of allied forces' actions during WWII without it mentioning the Germans, Japanese or Italians?"

I'm not saying that. The information about Google and Android is fine. My issue is with the tone in which he writes. It is very negative and wears on me at least. Hard to make even half way through this one. The information is great. The underlying message "Google takes shortcuts because building a quality and secure OS is not its priority" is also fine. You can make a point and cite facts without sounding like you are whining about it.
post #13 of 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

This seems more interesting to me: Apple hires fresh talent for ‘iWatch’

If Apple's just now hiring for wearable tech projects then we're not seeing anything from them in 2013, and probably not until mid-late 2014.

I'm not sure (although I expect the archive experts will correct me if I am wrong) history bears that out. Haven't there been increase hirings, for particular product divisions in ramp ups, quite close to launches in the past? Maybe I'm just being overly hopeful and want to see AAPL get another bounce ASAP by the folks that buy on irrational impulse due to new product launches. 1smile.gif
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #14 of 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

That's like saying, "why can't we have a book about the history of allied forces' actions during WWII without it mentioning the Germans, Japanese or Italians?"

Hmm... I don't think that qualifies for the title, but it's close. 1wink.gif

Let's call it a Godwin Slingshot Maneuver.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #15 of 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phone-UI-Guy View Post

I'm not saying that. The information about Google and Android is fine. My issue is with the tone in which he writes. It is very negative and wears on me at least. Hard to make even half way through this one. The information is great. The underlying message "Google takes shortcuts because building a quality and secure OS is not its priority" is also fine. You can make a point and cite facts without sounding like you are whining about it.


OK, I just didn't read it with the same inflection then. Maybe my intolerance for the copycat and rip off merchants tunes out what you read as 'negative'. I'd say he is extremely gentle on the lot of them in this article.
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #16 of 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Hmm... I don't think that qualifies for the title, but it's close. 1wink.gif

Let's call it a Godwin Slingshot Maneuver.

So your saying it had gravitas or just gravity? 1smile.gif
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #17 of 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

I'm not sure (although I expect the archive experts will correct me if I am wrong) history bears that out. Haven't there been increase hirings, for particular product divisions in ramp ups, quite close to launches in the past? Maybe I'm just being overly hopeful and want to see AAPL get another bounce ASAP by the folks that buy on irrational impulse due to new product launches. 1smile.gif
Could be. Guess I don't really know the history on this. It does make me think though that this isn't going to be what a lot of people are expecting (e.g. something like pebble). Apple has tons of great engineers. They wouldn't need to hire fresh talent if they were just building a nano-like watch.
post #18 of 180
DED now is kind of hysterical about Android, perhaps there is some kind of inner insecurity. From technical point of view, Android will have a very hard time to catch on, if at all. The first impression I had with Android SDk was that was very similar in concept with a phone os I worked on back in 99. It was a phone is designed with manufacture as the potential customers. So initially the security was very weak. Also the framework hinders the development for complicated apps. iOS has been a miniaturized computer os from day one. From a developer's point of view the gap between iOS and Android has been widening. Android still does not have a coreData equivalent that was introduced iniOs 3. iOS 5 added storyboard. Android layout editor is still worse than Interface builder for iOS 2.0. Perhaps that is the reason google now put chrome and android in the same group.
post #19 of 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Could be. Guess I don't really know the history on this. It does make me think though that this isn't going to be what a lot of people are expecting (e.g. something like pebble). Apple has tons of great engineers. They wouldn't need to hire fresh talent if they were just building a nano-like watch.

I'd agree with that. I really hope it isn't going to be what people are expecting nor what the 'let's get it out there before Apple' brigade thought either. Having said that, Apple's trump card, in all this Dick Tracy stuff, is the eco system 'whatever it is' will slot seamlessly into, that makes the big difference.
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #20 of 180
Great article - very informative. Didn't know half that stuff, really appreciate the whole story. And from someone who isn't simply trying to hop on the bandwagon by recycling other news stories to create click bait. You've obviously written this article out of some deeper thought and research than many mainstream newspapers.
post #21 of 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phone-UI-Guy View Post

I'm not saying that. The information about Google and Android is fine. My issue is with the tone in which he writes. It is very negative and wears on me at least. Hard to make even half way through this one. The information is great. The underlying message "Google takes shortcuts because building a quality and secure OS is not its priority" is also fine. You can make a point and cite facts without sounding like you are whining about it.


OK, I just didn't read it with the same inflection then. Maybe my intolerance for the copycat and rip off merchants tunes out what you read as 'negative'. I'd say he is extremely gentle on the lot of them in this article.

I share your intolerance the all thing google, android, and samsung. I have an addition one for the quality I expect for people that represent themselves as journalist. Honestly, if he ditched the negativity and positioned the facts a little better, they could be some of the best journalism on Apple ever. Right now they are more like blog posts than editorials.
post #22 of 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by BwhAgain View Post

DED now is kind of hysterical about Android, perhaps there is some kind of inner insecurity. From technical point of view, Android will have a very hard time to catch on, if at all. The first impression I had with Android SDk was that was very similar in concept with a phone os I worked on back in 99. It was a phone is designed with manufacture as the potential customers. So initially the security was very weak. Also the framework hinders the development for complicated apps. iOS has been a miniaturized computer os from day one. From a developer's point of view the gap between iOS and Android has been widening. Android still does not have a coreData equivalent that was introduced iniOs 3. iOS 5 added storyboard. Android layout editor is still worse than Interface builder for iOS 2.0. Perhaps that is the reason google now put chrome and android in the same group.

I think too many folks are hysterical about DED's view of Android. 1wink.gif I do agree about the opposite directions iOS and Android came from. What alternative did Google have given they had Android ready to go as a BB rip off when the decision was made (I favor the Eric connection but no proof) to rip off Apple's new concept. They had to layer the touch interface on top and run as fast as they could.
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #23 of 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phone-UI-Guy View Post

I share your intolerance the all thing google, android, and samsung. I have an addition one for the quality I expect for people that represent themselves as journalist. Honestly, if he ditched the negativity and positioned the facts a little better, they could be some of the best journalism on Apple ever. Right now they are more like blog posts than editorials.

Ok, perhaps he should keep them this way for AI where we love red meat and massage them for the rest of the world 1smile.gif
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #24 of 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by iOSx View Post

Can we get more Apple news, and less Android hate?

It's the weekend... I have a feeling this story will sit on top of this site until Monday... 1hmm.gif
post #25 of 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by iOSx View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by sflocal View Post

If the cold, dark reality scares you, then scurry back to the corner of the room Mr. One-post drive-by.


DED is not wasting his time with "hate" stuff as you put it.  He is simply writing - very clearly - the advantages of iOS, the real truth that went on when Jobs unveiled the iPhone, and the botched, half-a$$ system that Android is.


I remember the iPhone being introduced back in 2007 and I knew mobile would never be the same.  I also remember what really happened back then and all the propaganda being put out by iHaters, and the clueless media as they attempt to rewrite history and making it sound like the iPhone really wasn't a big deal.
If this journalist could get an interview with Steve Jobs, surely he could spend the time looking into future Apple products. Maybe he can try to dig up some details about the A7, or possibly unannounced OS features. You know, the news that actually matters.

I don't think he interviewed Steve. He asked a question at the shareholder meeting mentioned later in the article. If that was it, that's no interview for the record.
post #26 of 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

I think too many folks are hysterical about DED's view of Android. 1wink.gif I do agree about the opposite directions iOS and Android came from. What alternative did Google have given they had Android ready to go as a BB rip off when the decision was made (I favor the Eric connection but no proof) to rip off Apple's new concept. They had to layer the touch interface on top and run as fast as they could.
Talking about ripping off BB, yes I was doing BB development back then, android phone's design was a carbon copy of BB, the roller ball, back and menu button, green and red buttons. The only difference was google added a search button. However we should give credit for google, at least they know who's the guy to copy. They immediately shifted gear when seeing iPhone. While RIM doodled for 3 years before waking up.
post #27 of 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phone-UI-Guy View Post

I don't think he interviewed Steve. He asked a question at the shareholder meeting mentioned later in the article. If that was it, that's no interview for the record.

That's how I read it too.
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #28 of 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by BwhAgain View Post

Talking about ripping off BB, yes I was doing BB development back then, android phone's design was a carbon copy of BB, the roller ball, back and menu button, green and red buttons. The only difference was google added a search button. However we should give credit for google, at least they know who's the guy to copy. They immediately shifted gear when seeing iPhone. While RIM doodled for 3 years before waking up.

Yes they sure know who to copy although I still believe Eric was a mole feeding them info as he got it, albeit conceptual, I doubt directors had access to actual data. Had the iPhone never been released and Google had gone ahead to take on BB with their rip off, I wonder how history would have played out.
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #29 of 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phone-UI-Guy View Post

I share your intolerance the all thing google, android, and samsung. I have an addition one for the quality I expect for people that represent themselves as journalist. Honestly, if he ditched the negativity and positioned the facts a little better, they could be some of the best journalism on Apple ever. Right now they are more like blog posts than editorials.

Ok, perhaps he should keep them this way for AI where we love red meat and massage them for the rest of the world 1smile.gif

Quite a few mainstream news outlets are citing AI. A more professional positioning of the facts could do more to help with the larger problems with the mainstream media. Him whining about how they all missed his big insight won't help. Hime citing the question asked an answered as early proof of Apple's intention is enough. I'm hopeful DED steps up to the greater task at hand. The facts laid out in either style are welcome on AI for sure. I want them to go further.
post #30 of 180

A bit disingenuous to start your story off with a line that  you "interviewed" Steve Jobs when in reality you asked a question at a stock holders meeting. An interview implies a face to face detailed conversation or at the very least a series of questions or something a little more intimate than asking a question over a mic far away in a crowded room. You can also have telephone or Skype interviews, but again I would think that would mean a series of questions. This article gave me a sense of déja vu since it read a bit like a compilation with bits and pieces taken from many of your other recent articles. I think you were a bit too ambitious and tried to tackle too many very complex themes and a rather long time span. There were lots of dots but I don't think you connected them well. A little more Georges Seurat and a little less Jackson Pollock. With a little more surgical precision and less hyperbole you might make a more convincing case.

 

Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience. 

Reply

 

Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience. 

Reply
post #31 of 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phone-UI-Guy View Post

Quite a few mainstream news outlets are citing AI. A more professional positioning of the facts could do more to help with the larger problems with the mainstream media. Him whining about how they all missed his big insight won't help. Hime citing the question asked an answered as early proof of Apple's intention is enough. I'm hopeful DED steps up to the greater task at hand. The facts laid out in either style are welcome on AI for sure. I want them to go further.

Ok I tend to overlook citing data ... done with links ... You are right, we need more journalists out there explaining what's going on than we have and it should come across as balanced and fact driven. I see what you are saying.

Many people I know who love their Apple products are buying into all the anti Apple journalism out there. I have even been asked if I think Apple will be around in a couple of years! Ha!
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #32 of 180
Thanks for this quality editorial!
post #33 of 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac View Post

A bit disingenuous to start your story off with a line that  you "interviewed" Steve Jobs when in reality you asked a question at a stock holders meeting. An interview implies a face to face detailed conversation or at the very least a series of questions or something a little more intimate than asking a question over a mic far away in a crowded room. You can also have telephone or Skype interviews, but again I would think that would mean a series of questions. This article gave me a sense of déja vu since it read a bit like a compilation with bits and pieces taken from many of your other recent articles. I think you were a bit too ambitious and tried to tackle too many very complex themes and a rather long time span. There were lots of dots but I don't think you connected them well. A little more Georges Seurat and a little less Jackson Pollock. With a little more surgical precision and less hyperbole you might make a more convincing case.

You guys are winning me over. DED's stuff is so good factually he should aim higher journalistically and by that I mean higher than simply for us here, the AI readership.
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #34 of 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phone-UI-Guy View Post


I'm not saying that. The information about Google and Android is fine. My issue is with the tone in which he writes. It is very negative and wears on me at least. Hard to make even half way through this one. The information is great. The underlying message "Google takes shortcuts because building a quality and secure OS is not its priority" is also fine. You can make a point and cite facts without sounding like you are whining about it.

 

Get out of the kitchen if you can't stand the heat, it was a very good write-up.

post #35 of 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phone-UI-Guy View Post

Quite a few mainstream news outlets are citing AI. A more professional positioning of the facts could do more to help with the larger problems with the mainstream media. Him whining about how they all missed his big insight won't help. Hime citing the question asked an answered as early proof of Apple's intention is enough. I'm hopeful DED steps up to the greater task at hand. The facts laid out in either style are welcome on AI for sure. I want them to go further.

Ok I tend to overlook citing data ... done with links ... You are right, we need more journalists out there explaining what's going on than we have and it should come across as balanced and fact driven. I see what you are saying.

Many people I know who love their Apple products are buying into all the anti Apple journalism out there. I have even been asked if I think Apple will be around in a couple of years! Ha!

It is very sad. Apple is doing so much right, yet getting so much bad press. Crap reporting and endless beat down on the stock are so over done. I'm happy taking the dividend, but it would be nice to see more appreciation in the stock considering how well Apple is actually executing.
post #36 of 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phone-UI-Guy View Post

It is very sad. Apple is doing so much right, yet getting so much bad press. Crap reporting and endless beat down on the stock are so over done. I'm happy taking the dividend, but it would be nice to see more appreciation in the stock considering how well Apple is actually executing.

Hear hear!
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #37 of 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

This seems more interesting to me: Apple hires fresh talent for ‘iWatch’

If Apple's just now hiring for wearable tech projects then we're not seeing anything from them in 2013, and probably not until mid-late 2014.

 

Apple probably has been working on the so-called iWatch for more than five years, before 2013 or 2014, big engineering projects take years, at least at Apple they do. I'm interested in the Liquid Metal possibilities, rumors about this material and Apple have been around since 2009-2010.

post #38 of 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danox View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phone-UI-Guy View Post

I'm not saying that. The information about Google and Android is fine. My issue is with the tone in which he writes. It is very negative and wears on me at least. Hard to make even half way through this one. The information is great. The underlying message "Google takes shortcuts because building a quality and secure OS is not its priority" is also fine. You can make a point and cite facts without sounding like you are whining about it.

Get out of the kitchen if you can't stand the heat, it was a very good write-up.

Did you use a bad analogy on purpose? I read what I could and skimmed the rest. My tolerance has been dropping with each editorial. I was at least able to read through all the rest. You say "very good", but lets all ask for great ok?
post #39 of 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phone-UI-Guy View Post


I share your intolerance the all thing google, android, and samsung. I have an addition one for the quality I expect for people that represent themselves as journalist. Honestly, if he ditched the negativity and positioned the facts a little better, they could be some of the best journalism on Apple ever. Right now they are more like blog posts than editorials.

 

It was a good article Google, Amazon are competitors with Apple, what do you want sugar on top, Google is a Ad (smoke and mirrors) company at it's heart, Apple isn't and never has been.

post #40 of 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Why Android doesn't have great apps

This "platform war" meme is for phone makers and fans, but the more successful devs don't generally buy into it, simply developing for both.

 

How many of these popular iOS apps aren't available for Android?  Can you list even a dozen from the top 100 iOS apps that aren't also in Google Play?

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • Editorial: Google's Android haunted by Steve Jobs' warnings on app signing security
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Editorial: Google's Android haunted by Steve Jobs' warnings on app signing security