Yes, but Apple is publisher who will not let you get publications from other sources. You can't DL content to your iPhone from other web sites, so in that manner Apple is censoring what is available to you as an iPhone user.
Of course you can change phone, still, I think that publishing parallel is too loose.
I know that there are concerns about the level of control that Apple exerts over the iPhone/Touch, App Store. However, the trade-off is that this is a very secure environment, especially to do financial transactions.
Uh, apparently you don't read computer related security sites too much.
Google "iphone security" and ignore the jail broken articles.
Quote:
I have use Windows with Cisco PIX 500 Firewall, anti virus and spam software. I still got hit with the computer rendered unusable. The MacOSX is better, but it is exposed.
Malware writers check their code against the latest virus definitions and anti-virus to make sure it gets through. Once in, it hijacks the anti-virus to lie to you, keep other malware off too even.
OS X, Unix and Linux is strong as they are file permissions based OS's.
Quote:
I am looking forward to the iPad to use it for secure encrypted transactions.
If it only comes with Safari, I would think twice. Firefox is more secure and gets updated faster, has security related plug-ins. Safari is "trivial" to hack.
You might be better on a Mac than a iPad, as you can install additional security software Apple might not allow on the App store or use bypasses or tweak things under the hood. The iPad is a closed device, dependent upon the App Store approval process.
You can install Little Snitch and RCDefaultApp on a Mac, have more control what your machine does as a preventative way to break a exploit cycle, likely not to appear on a iPad though.
Quote:
Anyways, anybody who wants to roam wild, they can jail-break the iPhone OS, get into all kinds of sites and download porn, or anything else. Or get another OS device and take their chances. It is a matter of choice.
There are sites that will take down a Mac running Safari and some even Firefox. Certainly a iPhone is no problem as it's even weaker than a Mac and people put their private info on it more than a computer even.
Linux and Firefox is safe as it's got a tiny market share, a netbook with Ubuntu makes a good pr0n machine, keeping no id info on it. Mac's announce the owner like a trumpet, puts your name everywhere for everyone to see who you are, not very private machine. Address book isn't even encrypted. Dashboard has to phone Apple twice a day to make sure you didn't install a trojan widget, which of course would be the first thing disabled if you did, so it's no help actually.
Windows is still a nightmare. Mac's are on the bad guys radar, search the open source components for vulnerabilities and the same components on a Mac are also exploitable. Because Apple is slow to update their open source parts of OS X. Hit the wrong site with Safari and your pwned.
That's not really helping. I (and presumably Dr. Millmoss) literally have no idea what you're talking about. And that doesn't have anything to do with some imagined opinion about what's in the mind of Apple's customers.
Well let me explain it to you very carefully so you can connect the dots.
1. The "Dr." disagrees that other, more knowledgeable, tech savvy users have no influence over what the average know-nothing user buys.
2. Clearly he must feel the same way about switchers to the Mac.
3. If that is his belief then he must believe that these users, almost all having never used a Mac, are knowledgeable about tech to be able choose what is initially a more expensive product over a cheaper Windows machine which they already know.
4. Now under that premise, the primary argument that the fanboys have made on these forums and many blogs have made, much like the "Dr.", is that things (like multitasking or any user control whatsoever) are way too complex for the average user. The same user, by his logic, who was tech savvy enough to switch to a Mac in the first place.
These things are a hypocrisy. Either these users aren't knowledgeable, which makes my initial post true, or that Apple is unnecessarily putting restrictions on a user base which knows what they they are doing. These two ideas cannot comfortably coexist.
i'll admit that while i may have done some programming back in graduate school, today's coding leaves that type of work in the dust. that said, the first of these "un-" words have been bandied about as if synonyms. unpublished connotes not released to the PUBLIC; unsupported connotes released and "use at your own risk."
this article says that the developers are alleged to have used "unpublished" apis. as the sdks contain all "apple-blessed" software, including apis, then apple SHOULD know if an "unpublished" api was used or not used in any given application. that said, if apple released the software in the sdk, then it is NOT unpublished, perhaps unsupported, but NOT unpublished. so using this logic, apple should not have even approved the apps in the first place and thus notified the developers that they used "unsupported" api hooks, and not "unpublished." the more appropriate term to use would have been the last term "unreleased." but this too puts all developers into a hole nevertheless for how can a developer truly develop apps if the tools given to them by apple aren't APPROVED in any manner, way, shape, or form...until apple designs/releases the hardware that these hooks (i.e., the api) will actually use. so if the developer is going to be punished AFTER the time and effort is expended in creating an app, then limit the sdk and don't cause them financial loss or force them away from developing for US...admit it, the developers don't do it for apple!!!
so if apple doesn't want developers to use an api, then DON'T put it into the sdk; DON'T release it; DON'T publish it. if a particular api, or set, IS placed into the sdk, then apple should simply state that while present, they are UNSUPPORTED and they are to be used "at your own risk."
removing an APPROVED and UNOBJECTIONABLE app while using an apple-approved sdk is just wrong. if apple doesn't want an api to be used, then don't put it into the sdk.
Probably >90% of the apps on the app store offers minimal functionality... What's next? A purging of tip calculators?
Ultimately, it is driving developers away from iPhone/iPod/iPad development and toward Android...
The problem with the App Store is it takes too long to review the apps.
Something like only 20 apps per page and it takes 10 seconds to load each page on cable.
There is no description on the main page of 20 apps, so you click to find out what Ty4Smart App is and that takes another 10 seconds and another 10 seconds to go back.
There are hardly any reviews neither. All you can do is go by the most sold, and that's games.
Apple's web site on a larger screen computer doesn't even have a easy way to review apps.
100,000 apps and no way to find the good ones from all the crap.
Apple goes a purging for what? To have less apps? To decide for us what is good or bad?
Heck I didn't even know there was a wifi detector app, I think I would have like that one, if I knew about it.
Apple doesn't make it easy to be a Apple customer anymore.
There are sites that will take down a Mac running Safari and some even Firefox. Certainly a iPhone is no problem as it's even weaker than a Mac and people put their private info on it more than a computer even.
Linux and Firefox is safe as it's got a tiny market share, a netbook with Ubuntu makes a good pr0n machine, keeping no id info on it. Mac's announce the owner like a trumpet, puts your name everywhere for everyone to see who you are, not very private machine. Address book isn't even encrypted. Dashboard has to phone Apple twice a day to make sure you didn't install a trojan widget, which of course would be the first thing disabled if you did, so it's no help actually.
Windows is still a nightmare. Mac's are on the bad guys radar, search the open source components for vulnerabilities and the same components on a Mac are also exploitable. Because Apple is slow to update their open source parts of OS X. Hit the wrong site with Safari and your pwned.
It's much more difficult or even near impossible to take down Safari since it's basically a page viewer on the iPhone. On the Mac it's definitely easier also with the help of Flash. The Mac has the same benefits as Linux users do of security through obscurity. Apple's worldwide market share is only around 3% even though it is slowly growing.
The problem with the App Store is it takes too long to review the apps.
Something like only 20 apps per page and it takes 10 seconds to load each page on cable.
There is no description on the main page of 20 apps, so you click to find out what Ty4Smart App is and that takes another 10 seconds and another 10 seconds to go back.
There are hardly any reviews neither. All you can do is go by the most sold, and that's games.
Apple's web site on a larger screen computer doesn't even have a easy way to review apps.
100,000 apps and no way to find the good ones from all the crap.
Apple goes a purging for what? To have less apps? To decide for us what is good or bad?
Heck I didn't even know there was a wifi detector app, I think I would have like that one, if I knew about it.
Apple doesn't make it easy to be a Apple customer anymore.
Totally agree. The app store absolutely sucks for finding apps... I would love for someone to defend this. Purging app whether crap, overly sexy, minimal functionality, or whatever the catch phrase of the week is just plain wrong. Its far, far too soon for Apple to be pulling this crap. Here's an idea. How about fixing the presentation of App store so users have an easier time finding apps? And while you are at it, why don't you fix the bloated pig that iTunes is becoming...
Developers are the life blood of the store. Google's Android is a very real threat. Apple is doing a great job pushing developers towards Google.
[...] this time removing Wi-Fi scanners and software it said has "minimum user functionality."
yeah, tell that to my friend. she was out a few days ago and did not bring the address of where she was supposed to be. she has an ipod touch. she used wifi-where to find a hotspot and then used safari to find the address. but i guess that's not very useful.
thank goodness i can still buy ifart mobile (now with fart buddies)!
It's much more difficult or even near impossible to take down Safari since it's basically a page viewer on the iPhone. On the Mac it's definitely easier also with the help of Flash. The Mac has the same benefits as Linux users do of security through obscurity. Apple's worldwide market share is only around 3% even though it is slowly growing.
In 2007 a vulnerability was found in mobile Safari that would take down a iPhone, luckily the white hat notified Apple and it was patched.
In 2009 another vulnerability was found by the same guy, that would allow shell code to run on a iPhone.
Yes, Flash can be a entry point, pr0n sites like to use it a lot. Mostly full of Windows IE exploits, crashes Safari though more often as the exploits not designed to work for it.
Mac's are no longer obscure, Safari was first to fall in CanSecWest, next was IE and only Ubuntu/Firefox remained untouched as it's a really obscure OS
Totally agree. The app store absolutely sucks for finding apps... I would love for someone to defend this. Purging app whether crap, overly sexy, minimal functionality, or whatever the catch phrase of the week is just plain wrong. Its far, far too soon for Apple to be pulling this crap. Here's an idea. How about fixing the presentation of App store so users have an easier time finding apps? And while you are at it, why don't you fix the bloated pig that iTunes is becoming...
Developers are the life blood of the store. Google's Android is a very real threat. Apple is doing a great job pushing developers towards Google.
Yea and Apple is coming out with the MacBook replacement called the iPad and it has a less powerful processor than the MacBook, so how is it going to run better than iTunes on a Mac?
Oh, they are going to trim the App Store down of Apps so it will run better.
Apple hates people accessing private APIs or underlying hardware. It prevents them from changing the implementation.
A likely reason may be that iPhone 4.0 changes the private API that the wifi apps are using. Rather than having them all break when 4.0 comes out, making the release look bad, Apple bans them now over the access violation.
Since there is clearly a need and desire for access to the private API, Apple will probably clean it up and add it to the public APIs. Then the apps will return.
I would think that their app scanning software would be able to find calls to unpublished APIs. Wouldn't it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zendolphyn
My 2 year old little girl loves an app that makes the phone Quack like a duck when you shake it.
Sounds cute. A buddy's daughter really loves the "Fluid" app that looks like water rippling over a stream bed, you touch the screen and ripples radiate. It seems to me that all it would really need to do is to add game-like functionality.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610
First you complain about all the "junk" on the App store.
Then you complain about Apple removing some of the worst offenders (sexual content.)
Then you scream about censorship, so Apple creates a category for it, and reinstates some unfortunate casualties.
You continue to bemoan the "junk" on the App store.
Apple removes some of it in an effort to clean it up.
You then scream about censorship.
Some of you people must be completely batsh*t insane. You have ZERO cause to complain about the App Store, in part because it's the most successful thing in tech since the transistor, and in part because the one time Apple actually bends over and addresses these issues you scream bloody murder.
I think you're probably conflating a group of likely diverse people as a single entity. The primary culprit for that hasn't even posted in this thread yet that I noticed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inkling
Do Wi-Fi scanners have "minimum user functionality"? First, that's for me to decide and not Apple. I know what I need better than they. Second, these apps are quite useful. Just a few days ago, I used eWifi to discover the best channel for my WiFi and to tailor its coverage so I interfere as little as possible with my neighbors. For that, it's much more useful than Apple's woefully deficient built-in app. Am I seeing a pattern here? Does Apple get envious when others do something better than they?
It's nice to see an explanation why the app would be more useful than the Settings panel. That's one app that would have been nice to know about before they were yanked, but then, if the private API changes, then it might only be useful for a few more months.
Just to clarify, the article covered two different issues whose only common element is being in the App Store. The WiFi finders were axed for using private APIs. *Other* apps were axed for being "minimum user functionality". I think it's too bad the articles couldn't be broken down into their atomic articles.
Totally agree. The app store absolutely sucks for finding apps... I would love for someone to defend this. Purging app whether crap, overly sexy, minimal functionality, or whatever the catch phrase of the week is just plain wrong. Its far, far too soon for Apple to be pulling this crap. Here's an idea. How about fixing the presentation of App store so users have an easier time finding apps? And while you are at it, why don't you fix the bloated pig that iTunes is becoming...
They've already revamped it once when they moved to a WebKit-based store and the growth has been phenomenal that i don't think it's a crazy idea to think that Apple is still playing catch up with this new service.
The iTS layout has always been cluttered and slow so I don't know why the App Store is being singled out here. Besides that, why would anyone want to peruse one-by-one 160k apps without having some idea of what they want. I've pointed out to Woohoo! before that a simple google search works wonders and the many sites that list their opinion of the best apps and top apps of the week, all with reviews.
Finally, there is always iTunes Preview if you want to just go through each app without first narrowing your parameters.
Personally, I don't grocery shop my apps and media going up and down the aisles without a game plan. I don't understand that type of shopping but I'm fine with it. What I haven't seen is any idea of how Apple can fix. I haven't even read a rudimentary model for making it more functional, just the "it's broken they should fix it" mantra. Finding solutions are much more satisfying than finding problems. For instance, in relation to iPhone apps, I'd like Apple to introduce Smart Folders for iPhone OS (eg: categories, used in x-many days). Also, in iTunes, I'd like them to list the last time an app was used, like in Windows Program Manager, which would save me and Apple from constantly updating apps that I just won't use but will likely never delete from my iTunes account because they are out of sight and out of mind.
PS: I thought they added an App Genius feature in iTunes 9, but I can't seem to find it. Was that just a rumour?
Yea and Apple is coming out with the MacBook replacement called the iPad and it has a less powerful processor than the MacBook, so how is it going to run better than iTunes on a Mac?
Do you have anything to back up this claim that it's a replacement to the MacBook?
My 2 year old little girl loves an app that makes the phone Quack like a duck when you shake it.
Apple is definitely crossing the line into full-blown censorship. I've been an Apple consumer for quite a long time but this is really starting to give me the creeps.
Agreed, it's a lazy approach. Ban a whole genre of apps just so you don't have to police the really malicious ones. This is not going to bode well for them in the end, it will make a lot of developers angry & without developers the app store is nothing.
In 2007 a vulnerability was found in mobile Safari that would take down a iPhone, luckily the white hat notified Apple and it was patched.
In 2009 another vulnerability was found by the same guy, that would allow shell code to run on a iPhone.
Yes, Flash can be a entry point, pr0n sites like to use it a lot. Mostly full of Windows IE exploits, crashes Safari though more often as the exploits not designed to work for it.
Mac's are no longer obscure, Safari was first to fall in CanSecWest, next was IE and only Ubuntu/Firefox remained untouched as it's a really obscure OS
You're talking about a dedicated attack to win a contest. Malicious attacks are mostly for money. There is simply not enough Mac market share to warrant those attacks. It is the reason why they're been so few attacks against the Mac.
From Charlie Miller, the guy who has taken down Safari the last few years in contests:
On the mobile side of Pwn2Own 2010, the big targets will be iPhone 3GS/iPhone OS and Android/Motorola Droid. Which one will be more easily exploitable?
They?re both pretty secure. I?d guess the iPhone because its been around a little longer and there has been more research done on it. So, its not that its necessarily less secure, its just researchers understand how it works better.
I am really starting to get aggravated with what Apple is doing with the App store. They got to stop tying to be the iPhone Nanny and let the market decide what's useful. I have no problem with them dumping the Overtly Sexual Apps in fact I applaud them for doing so. For them to decide that an App isn't useful enough shouldn't be their call. It wouldn't be a problem if they weren't the only game in town. They gotta stop trying to be the Nanny of the Computer World and decide what is best for us.
What really has me riled is the removal of WiFi scanner Apps. These are extremely useful when you go to a hotel and are having problems getting decent WiFi reception. A quick walk down the hall can help determine what rooms will get good reception and using the same thing inside the room can help determine the best place to use your laptop. Sometimes just moving a few feet makes all the difference. I just recomended yFy Network Finder to a client that sends Photographers to shoot in FL in the winter and was having WiFi problems in the hotel to upload them to our servers at night. A WiFi scanner app in the iPhone can really help them out. I'm an RV person and using it to find what areas of the campground have decent WiFi is extremely useful to me. Thankfully I already bought my App but I can now only tell my clients to use Android phones for getting hotel rooms with a decent WiFi signal.
I am really going to have to think hard about an iPad. Really, an Android Tablet like Notion Ink blows it away and I don't have to worry about Apple dictating what can and can't be run on it.
Well let me explain it to you very carefully so you can connect the dots.
1. The "Dr." disagrees that other, more knowledgeable, tech savvy users have no influence over what the average know-nothing user buys.
Let's see, he disagrees that tech savvy users have no influence. So he thinks that tech savvy users do have influence?
Quote:
2. Clearly he must feel the same way about switchers to the Mac.
OK. He thinks that tech savvy users influence switchers, who apparently are your average know-nothing users.
Quote:
3. If that is his belief then he must believe that these users, almost all having never used a Mac, are knowledgeable about tech to be able choose what is initially a more expensive product over a cheaper Windows machine which they already know.
Uh oh. Looks like we must have taken a U-turn at the triple negative. So I'm guessing that you initially meant he agrees that tech savvy users have no influence, since, um, these Mac buyers are able to go it alone?
Quote:
4. Now under that premise, the primary argument that the fanboys have made on these forums and many blogs have made, much like the "Dr.", is that things (like multitasking or any user control whatsoever) are way too complex for the average user. The same user, by his logic, who was tech savvy enough to switch to a Mac in the first place.
Or, you know, people switch to a Mac because it's the other mainstream platform and they have their reasons for either growing disenchanted with Windows or being attracted to Apple, such as owning an iPhone, liking the industrial design, hearing tell about Apple's high customer satisfaction rating, wanting to run some particular Mac only software, running in a circle with high Mac adoption and feeling peer pressure, or any other of a half dozen reasons I can think of off the top of my head that don't require any particular technical sophistication.
Quote:
These things are a hypocrisy. Either these users aren't knowledgeable, which makes my initial post true, or that Apple is unnecessarily putting restrictions on a user base which knows what they they are doing. These two ideas cannot comfortably coexist.
Yeah. That's insane. All you've done is construct a little circular game based on the ridiculous premise "anyone who switches to a Mac is tech savvy", followed on by the non-sequitur "therefore such users couldn't possibly desire an even easier to use device" implying an unspoken but no less inane inference that Apple only intends to sell iPads to "switchers" which I guess means that..... we're all hypocrites? The iPad is doomed? Switchers are morons? I give up.
If that is the case, then why not let the devs do as they wish with APIs, letting them fix it upon software upgrades? It should not be Apple's priority or job to police if their own APIs are used or not. The developer however, should test their APIs on all iterations of Apple's software to make sure it works, including upgrades when they happen. How many apps have we seen so far that even using Apple's APIs, break upon software upgrades then require the dev. to upgrade themselves?
Because this is what Microsoft does. What happened is that when Microsoft finally changes the API, all the developers raise holy hell and Microsoft is forced to keep it and work around stuff that they desperately wanted to change. This is one reason why Windows Vista was shit.
Comments
Yes, but Apple is publisher who will not let you get publications from other sources. You can't DL content to your iPhone from other web sites, so in that manner Apple is censoring what is available to you as an iPhone user.
Of course you can change phone, still, I think that publishing parallel is too loose.
You just nullified your argument.
I know that there are concerns about the level of control that Apple exerts over the iPhone/Touch, App Store. However, the trade-off is that this is a very secure environment, especially to do financial transactions.
Uh, apparently you don't read computer related security sites too much.
Google "iphone security" and ignore the jail broken articles.
I have use Windows with Cisco PIX 500 Firewall, anti virus and spam software. I still got hit with the computer rendered unusable. The MacOSX is better, but it is exposed.
Malware writers check their code against the latest virus definitions and anti-virus to make sure it gets through. Once in, it hijacks the anti-virus to lie to you, keep other malware off too even.
OS X, Unix and Linux is strong as they are file permissions based OS's.
I am looking forward to the iPad to use it for secure encrypted transactions.
If it only comes with Safari, I would think twice. Firefox is more secure and gets updated faster, has security related plug-ins. Safari is "trivial" to hack.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-27080_3-10444561-245.html
You might be better on a Mac than a iPad, as you can install additional security software Apple might not allow on the App store or use bypasses or tweak things under the hood. The iPad is a closed device, dependent upon the App Store approval process.
You can install Little Snitch and RCDefaultApp on a Mac, have more control what your machine does as a preventative way to break a exploit cycle, likely not to appear on a iPad though.
Anyways, anybody who wants to roam wild, they can jail-break the iPhone OS, get into all kinds of sites and download porn, or anything else. Or get another OS device and take their chances. It is a matter of choice.
There are sites that will take down a Mac running Safari and some even Firefox. Certainly a iPhone is no problem as it's even weaker than a Mac and people put their private info on it more than a computer even.
Linux and Firefox is safe as it's got a tiny market share, a netbook with Ubuntu makes a good pr0n machine, keeping no id info on it. Mac's announce the owner like a trumpet, puts your name everywhere for everyone to see who you are, not very private machine. Address book isn't even encrypted. Dashboard has to phone Apple twice a day to make sure you didn't install a trojan widget, which of course would be the first thing disabled if you did, so it's no help actually.
Windows is still a nightmare. Mac's are on the bad guys radar, search the open source components for vulnerabilities and the same components on a Mac are also exploitable. Because Apple is slow to update their open source parts of OS X. Hit the wrong site with Safari and your pwned.
That's not really helping. I (and presumably Dr. Millmoss) literally have no idea what you're talking about. And that doesn't have anything to do with some imagined opinion about what's in the mind of Apple's customers.
Well let me explain it to you very carefully so you can connect the dots.
1. The "Dr." disagrees that other, more knowledgeable, tech savvy users have no influence over what the average know-nothing user buys.
2. Clearly he must feel the same way about switchers to the Mac.
3. If that is his belief then he must believe that these users, almost all having never used a Mac, are knowledgeable about tech to be able choose what is initially a more expensive product over a cheaper Windows machine which they already know.
4. Now under that premise, the primary argument that the fanboys have made on these forums and many blogs have made, much like the "Dr.", is that things (like multitasking or any user control whatsoever) are way too complex for the average user. The same user, by his logic, who was tech savvy enough to switch to a Mac in the first place.
These things are a hypocrisy. Either these users aren't knowledgeable, which makes my initial post true, or that Apple is unnecessarily putting restrictions on a user base which knows what they they are doing. These two ideas cannot comfortably coexist.
this article says that the developers are alleged to have used "unpublished" apis. as the sdks contain all "apple-blessed" software, including apis, then apple SHOULD know if an "unpublished" api was used or not used in any given application. that said, if apple released the software in the sdk, then it is NOT unpublished, perhaps unsupported, but NOT unpublished. so using this logic, apple should not have even approved the apps in the first place and thus notified the developers that they used "unsupported" api hooks, and not "unpublished." the more appropriate term to use would have been the last term "unreleased." but this too puts all developers into a hole nevertheless for how can a developer truly develop apps if the tools given to them by apple aren't APPROVED in any manner, way, shape, or form...until apple designs/releases the hardware that these hooks (i.e., the api) will actually use. so if the developer is going to be punished AFTER the time and effort is expended in creating an app, then limit the sdk and don't cause them financial loss or force them away from developing for US...admit it, the developers don't do it for apple!!!
so if apple doesn't want developers to use an api, then DON'T put it into the sdk; DON'T release it; DON'T publish it. if a particular api, or set, IS placed into the sdk, then apple should simply state that while present, they are UNSUPPORTED and they are to be used "at your own risk."
removing an APPROVED and UNOBJECTIONABLE app while using an apple-approved sdk is just wrong. if apple doesn't want an api to be used, then don't put it into the sdk.
...but that's just my opinion.
Ultimately, it is driving developers away from iPhone/iPod/iPad development and towards Android...
Probably >90% of the apps on the app store offers minimal functionality... What's next? A purging of tip calculators?
Ultimately, it is driving developers away from iPhone/iPod/iPad development and toward Android...
The problem with the App Store is it takes too long to review the apps.
Something like only 20 apps per page and it takes 10 seconds to load each page on cable.
There is no description on the main page of 20 apps, so you click to find out what Ty4Smart App is and that takes another 10 seconds and another 10 seconds to go back.
There are hardly any reviews neither. All you can do is go by the most sold, and that's games.
Apple's web site on a larger screen computer doesn't even have a easy way to review apps.
100,000 apps and no way to find the good ones from all the crap.
Apple goes a purging for what? To have less apps? To decide for us what is good or bad?
Heck I didn't even know there was a wifi detector app, I think I would have like that one, if I knew about it.
Apple doesn't make it easy to be a Apple customer anymore.
There are sites that will take down a Mac running Safari and some even Firefox. Certainly a iPhone is no problem as it's even weaker than a Mac and people put their private info on it more than a computer even.
Linux and Firefox is safe as it's got a tiny market share, a netbook with Ubuntu makes a good pr0n machine, keeping no id info on it. Mac's announce the owner like a trumpet, puts your name everywhere for everyone to see who you are, not very private machine. Address book isn't even encrypted. Dashboard has to phone Apple twice a day to make sure you didn't install a trojan widget, which of course would be the first thing disabled if you did, so it's no help actually.
Windows is still a nightmare. Mac's are on the bad guys radar, search the open source components for vulnerabilities and the same components on a Mac are also exploitable. Because Apple is slow to update their open source parts of OS X. Hit the wrong site with Safari and your pwned.
It's much more difficult or even near impossible to take down Safari since it's basically a page viewer on the iPhone. On the Mac it's definitely easier also with the help of Flash. The Mac has the same benefits as Linux users do of security through obscurity. Apple's worldwide market share is only around 3% even though it is slowly growing.
The problem with the App Store is it takes too long to review the apps.
Something like only 20 apps per page and it takes 10 seconds to load each page on cable.
There is no description on the main page of 20 apps, so you click to find out what Ty4Smart App is and that takes another 10 seconds and another 10 seconds to go back.
There are hardly any reviews neither. All you can do is go by the most sold, and that's games.
Apple's web site on a larger screen computer doesn't even have a easy way to review apps.
100,000 apps and no way to find the good ones from all the crap.
Apple goes a purging for what? To have less apps? To decide for us what is good or bad?
Heck I didn't even know there was a wifi detector app, I think I would have like that one, if I knew about it.
Apple doesn't make it easy to be a Apple customer anymore.
Totally agree. The app store absolutely sucks for finding apps... I would love for someone to defend this. Purging app whether crap, overly sexy, minimal functionality, or whatever the catch phrase of the week is just plain wrong. Its far, far too soon for Apple to be pulling this crap. Here's an idea. How about fixing the presentation of App store so users have an easier time finding apps? And while you are at it, why don't you fix the bloated pig that iTunes is becoming...
Developers are the life blood of the store. Google's Android is a very real threat. Apple is doing a great job pushing developers towards Google.
[...] this time removing Wi-Fi scanners and software it said has "minimum user functionality."
yeah, tell that to my friend. she was out a few days ago and did not bring the address of where she was supposed to be. she has an ipod touch. she used wifi-where to find a hotspot and then used safari to find the address. but i guess that's not very useful.
thank goodness i can still buy ifart mobile (now with fart buddies)!
It's much more difficult or even near impossible to take down Safari since it's basically a page viewer on the iPhone. On the Mac it's definitely easier also with the help of Flash. The Mac has the same benefits as Linux users do of security through obscurity. Apple's worldwide market share is only around 3% even though it is slowly growing.
In 2007 a vulnerability was found in mobile Safari that would take down a iPhone, luckily the white hat notified Apple and it was patched.
In 2009 another vulnerability was found by the same guy, that would allow shell code to run on a iPhone.
Yes, Flash can be a entry point, pr0n sites like to use it a lot. Mostly full of Windows IE exploits, crashes Safari though more often as the exploits not designed to work for it.
Mac's are no longer obscure, Safari was first to fall in CanSecWest, next was IE and only Ubuntu/Firefox remained untouched as it's a really obscure OS
Totally agree. The app store absolutely sucks for finding apps... I would love for someone to defend this. Purging app whether crap, overly sexy, minimal functionality, or whatever the catch phrase of the week is just plain wrong. Its far, far too soon for Apple to be pulling this crap. Here's an idea. How about fixing the presentation of App store so users have an easier time finding apps? And while you are at it, why don't you fix the bloated pig that iTunes is becoming...
Developers are the life blood of the store. Google's Android is a very real threat. Apple is doing a great job pushing developers towards Google.
Yea and Apple is coming out with the MacBook replacement called the iPad and it has a less powerful processor than the MacBook, so how is it going to run better than iTunes on a Mac?
Oh, they are going to trim the App Store down of Apps so it will run better.
Why didn't I think of that! *smacks head*
Apple hates people accessing private APIs or underlying hardware. It prevents them from changing the implementation.
A likely reason may be that iPhone 4.0 changes the private API that the wifi apps are using. Rather than having them all break when 4.0 comes out, making the release look bad, Apple bans them now over the access violation.
Since there is clearly a need and desire for access to the private API, Apple will probably clean it up and add it to the public APIs. Then the apps will return.
I would think that their app scanning software would be able to find calls to unpublished APIs. Wouldn't it?
My 2 year old little girl loves an app that makes the phone Quack like a duck when you shake it.
Sounds cute. A buddy's daughter really loves the "Fluid" app that looks like water rippling over a stream bed, you touch the screen and ripples radiate. It seems to me that all it would really need to do is to add game-like functionality.
First you complain about all the "junk" on the App store.
Then you complain about Apple removing some of the worst offenders (sexual content.)
Then you scream about censorship, so Apple creates a category for it, and reinstates some unfortunate casualties.
You continue to bemoan the "junk" on the App store.
Apple removes some of it in an effort to clean it up.
You then scream about censorship.
Some of you people must be completely batsh*t insane. You have ZERO cause to complain about the App Store, in part because it's the most successful thing in tech since the transistor, and in part because the one time Apple actually bends over and addresses these issues you scream bloody murder.
I think you're probably conflating a group of likely diverse people as a single entity. The primary culprit for that hasn't even posted in this thread yet that I noticed.
Do Wi-Fi scanners have "minimum user functionality"? First, that's for me to decide and not Apple. I know what I need better than they. Second, these apps are quite useful. Just a few days ago, I used eWifi to discover the best channel for my WiFi and to tailor its coverage so I interfere as little as possible with my neighbors. For that, it's much more useful than Apple's woefully deficient built-in app. Am I seeing a pattern here? Does Apple get envious when others do something better than they?
It's nice to see an explanation why the app would be more useful than the Settings panel. That's one app that would have been nice to know about before they were yanked, but then, if the private API changes, then it might only be useful for a few more months.
Just to clarify, the article covered two different issues whose only common element is being in the App Store. The WiFi finders were axed for using private APIs. *Other* apps were axed for being "minimum user functionality". I think it's too bad the articles couldn't be broken down into their atomic articles.
Totally agree. The app store absolutely sucks for finding apps... I would love for someone to defend this. Purging app whether crap, overly sexy, minimal functionality, or whatever the catch phrase of the week is just plain wrong. Its far, far too soon for Apple to be pulling this crap. Here's an idea. How about fixing the presentation of App store so users have an easier time finding apps? And while you are at it, why don't you fix the bloated pig that iTunes is becoming...
They've already revamped it once when they moved to a WebKit-based store and the growth has been phenomenal that i don't think it's a crazy idea to think that Apple is still playing catch up with this new service.
The iTS layout has always been cluttered and slow so I don't know why the App Store is being singled out here. Besides that, why would anyone want to peruse one-by-one 160k apps without having some idea of what they want. I've pointed out to Woohoo! before that a simple google search works wonders and the many sites that list their opinion of the best apps and top apps of the week, all with reviews.
Finally, there is always iTunes Preview if you want to just go through each app without first narrowing your parameters.
Personally, I don't grocery shop my apps and media going up and down the aisles without a game plan. I don't understand that type of shopping but I'm fine with it. What I haven't seen is any idea of how Apple can fix. I haven't even read a rudimentary model for making it more functional, just the "it's broken they should fix it" mantra. Finding solutions are much more satisfying than finding problems. For instance, in relation to iPhone apps, I'd like Apple to introduce Smart Folders for iPhone OS (eg: categories, used in x-many days). Also, in iTunes, I'd like them to list the last time an app was used, like in Windows Program Manager, which would save me and Apple from constantly updating apps that I just won't use but will likely never delete from my iTunes account because they are out of sight and out of mind.
PS: I thought they added an App Genius feature in iTunes 9, but I can't seem to find it. Was that just a rumour?
Yea and Apple is coming out with the MacBook replacement called the iPad and it has a less powerful processor than the MacBook, so how is it going to run better than iTunes on a Mac?
Do you have anything to back up this claim that it's a replacement to the MacBook?
My 2 year old little girl loves an app that makes the phone Quack like a duck when you shake it.
Apple is definitely crossing the line into full-blown censorship. I've been an Apple consumer for quite a long time but this is really starting to give me the creeps.
Agreed, it's a lazy approach. Ban a whole genre of apps just so you don't have to police the really malicious ones. This is not going to bode well for them in the end, it will make a lot of developers angry & without developers the app store is nothing.
In 2007 a vulnerability was found in mobile Safari that would take down a iPhone, luckily the white hat notified Apple and it was patched.
In 2009 another vulnerability was found by the same guy, that would allow shell code to run on a iPhone.
Yes, Flash can be a entry point, pr0n sites like to use it a lot. Mostly full of Windows IE exploits, crashes Safari though more often as the exploits not designed to work for it.
Mac's are no longer obscure, Safari was first to fall in CanSecWest, next was IE and only Ubuntu/Firefox remained untouched as it's a really obscure OS
You're talking about a dedicated attack to win a contest. Malicious attacks are mostly for money. There is simply not enough Mac market share to warrant those attacks. It is the reason why they're been so few attacks against the Mac.
From Charlie Miller, the guy who has taken down Safari the last few years in contests:
On the mobile side of Pwn2Own 2010, the big targets will be iPhone 3GS/iPhone OS and Android/Motorola Droid. Which one will be more easily exploitable?
They?re both pretty secure. I?d guess the iPhone because its been around a little longer and there has been more research done on it. So, its not that its necessarily less secure, its just researchers understand how it works better.
What really has me riled is the removal of WiFi scanner Apps. These are extremely useful when you go to a hotel and are having problems getting decent WiFi reception. A quick walk down the hall can help determine what rooms will get good reception and using the same thing inside the room can help determine the best place to use your laptop. Sometimes just moving a few feet makes all the difference. I just recomended yFy Network Finder to a client that sends Photographers to shoot in FL in the winter and was having WiFi problems in the hotel to upload them to our servers at night. A WiFi scanner app in the iPhone can really help them out. I'm an RV person and using it to find what areas of the campground have decent WiFi is extremely useful to me. Thankfully I already bought my App but I can now only tell my clients to use Android phones for getting hotel rooms with a decent WiFi signal.
I am really going to have to think hard about an iPad. Really, an Android Tablet like Notion Ink blows it away and I don't have to worry about Apple dictating what can and can't be run on it.
Wow. Where do you live? Up in the mountains of Idaho?
No, why?
When you purchase a house, you purchase ahouse. It's your to do with as you please.
Burn it down but you'll still owe a mortgage and will likely go to jail for endangerment or something.
Well let me explain it to you very carefully so you can connect the dots.
1. The "Dr." disagrees that other, more knowledgeable, tech savvy users have no influence over what the average know-nothing user buys.
Let's see, he disagrees that tech savvy users have no influence. So he thinks that tech savvy users do have influence?
2. Clearly he must feel the same way about switchers to the Mac.
OK. He thinks that tech savvy users influence switchers, who apparently are your average know-nothing users.
3. If that is his belief then he must believe that these users, almost all having never used a Mac, are knowledgeable about tech to be able choose what is initially a more expensive product over a cheaper Windows machine which they already know.
Uh oh. Looks like we must have taken a U-turn at the triple negative. So I'm guessing that you initially meant he agrees that tech savvy users have no influence, since, um, these Mac buyers are able to go it alone?
4. Now under that premise, the primary argument that the fanboys have made on these forums and many blogs have made, much like the "Dr.", is that things (like multitasking or any user control whatsoever) are way too complex for the average user. The same user, by his logic, who was tech savvy enough to switch to a Mac in the first place.
Or, you know, people switch to a Mac because it's the other mainstream platform and they have their reasons for either growing disenchanted with Windows or being attracted to Apple, such as owning an iPhone, liking the industrial design, hearing tell about Apple's high customer satisfaction rating, wanting to run some particular Mac only software, running in a circle with high Mac adoption and feeling peer pressure, or any other of a half dozen reasons I can think of off the top of my head that don't require any particular technical sophistication.
These things are a hypocrisy. Either these users aren't knowledgeable, which makes my initial post true, or that Apple is unnecessarily putting restrictions on a user base which knows what they they are doing. These two ideas cannot comfortably coexist.
Yeah. That's insane. All you've done is construct a little circular game based on the ridiculous premise "anyone who switches to a Mac is tech savvy", followed on by the non-sequitur "therefore such users couldn't possibly desire an even easier to use device" implying an unspoken but no less inane inference that Apple only intends to sell iPads to "switchers" which I guess means that..... we're all hypocrites? The iPad is doomed? Switchers are morons? I give up.
If that is the case, then why not let the devs do as they wish with APIs, letting them fix it upon software upgrades? It should not be Apple's priority or job to police if their own APIs are used or not. The developer however, should test their APIs on all iterations of Apple's software to make sure it works, including upgrades when they happen. How many apps have we seen so far that even using Apple's APIs, break upon software upgrades then require the dev. to upgrade themselves?
Because this is what Microsoft does. What happened is that when Microsoft finally changes the API, all the developers raise holy hell and Microsoft is forced to keep it and work around stuff that they desperately wanted to change. This is one reason why Windows Vista was shit.