I’m wondering where many of you stand on the open-source vs. proprietary software debate. Which is more secure? I believe most of the responses here would align more with being pro-proprietary software in terms of security, which has really been found to be quite the questionable stance.
Hmm, thats a bit of a bait question. But the question isn't that easy. Apple software is a mix of open source(*) and proprietary. It seems that the best way is to find the right balance.
J.
(*) darwin + BSD tools, Webkit, all compiler technology (llgen, gcc etc.) and so on.
Hmm, thats a bit of a bait question. But the question isn't that easy. Apple software is a mix of open source(*) and proprietary. It seems that the best way is to find the right balance.
J.
(*) darwin + BSD tools, Webkit, all compiler technology (llgen, gcc etc.) and so on.
Actually, it's a bit of a silly question. Neither is necessarily or inherently more or less secure than the other. Even if one can produce stats showing that overall, one is x% more secure than the other, that still tells you nothing when deciding between two specific alternatives, or even two alternative sets of software. (Clearly one can produce conjectures that one is more secure, but conjectures don't establish anything in and of themselves.) And it doesn't really have anything to do with the question at hand.
You know, all the talk about liberty is nonsense if it's being directed at the iPhone and Apple. They have the liberty to decide what they think consumers want and don't want. That means the consumer doesn't have the liberty to install whatever crap they want on their phones, only Apple-approved ones. And for all the whiners that complain that other developers weren't given their "fair shot" at the App Store, just remember they're profit making corporations as well, so they aren't given a right to liberty like you or me. The difference between Apple and the government is the right of liberty to vote with your money. That's all corporations give you, and that's how it's been for centuries, really. Whether you like it or not, maybe you should petition the government to regulate industries some more then But don't just exclude your judgment to Apple in particular, why not the ISPs, the telecom industries, the cable/content providers, etc. Those are far worse enterprises with real monopoly control.
Can we please just stop all of the hyperbolic, straw-man, BS?
This debate is not about freedom vs. limitations. This has nothing to do with average people clicking checkboxes to allow advanced functions, or Flash, or Google Voice, or business models, or any of the nonsense that has been tossed about in this thread.
Those who want to turn the iPhone into a UMPC, I will call the geek elite. For decades, they have been the gatekeepers of technology. To some degree, I am among them. We have decided what the average person should and should not have because we have been the only ones in our community who understood this stuff. We are like neighborhood IT managers. The workplace computer is not a product of what is desired or needed by the cube rat, but the IT person. That's what we have been for family, friends, and coworkers.
The smartphone used to be one of those devices that was only understood and used by the geek elite. Apple comes crashing into the party, producing a smartphone for the rest of us. This type of radical disintermediation made the geek elite obsolete. Suddenly, mom, dad, wife, and coworker were able to grasp a piece of geek tech without the geek. Suddenly, the everyday consumer was in charge of their electronic life.
Normal people don't want GV; geek elites do. Normal people don't even know what Flash is; only geek elites wet their pants over that. Normal people love the iTunes, the App Store, and all the glorious restrictions that go along with them. What geeks see as restrictions have actually set the masses free. Those restrictions have actually given the masses control over their digitals lives. So many of you have completely forgotten what a phone was like before the iPhone. Normal people haven't.
Android, and other iPhone competitors are nothing but the iPhone, but uglier, less intuitive, and brimming with more features that are incomprehensible and difficult to use, just the way the geek elite likes it. They are phones made by geeks, for geeks who have never been able to understand the average person.
Finally, it is time we put to rest, this nonsense about the iPhone needing competition and alternatives. That has always been a load of crap. Let us be perfectly clear. Android and the like are not alternatives to the iPhone. Their ilk have been around for 20 years. The geek elite phones and computers of the world existed without competition. People were forced to use those types of devices and get a lot of help from people they would rather beat up, or not use technology.
The iPhone is the alternative to the geek elite phone. WinMo, Palm, Rim, and others have been around for a long time shoving their techno-crap down our collective throats for ages. The iPhone came along and became the alternative to the traditional smartphone. iPhone users don't need any more choice; the iPhone was and is their choice! They choose a world that does not require people like us to install a safer browser and recommend the best anti-virus. In this brave new world, we are not the majority. We are not the elite sages and gatekeepers. We are not the schoolmasters. And we are not needed!
Please stop pretending that you take up these anti-Apple positions to protect the hapless consumer from the evil empire. The average consumer has more technological freedom than they have ever had, thank you very much. You hold your positions because Apple is disintermediating you out of the equation. When people choose the iPhone, they are rejecting you and your solutions. That is why so many people seem to take Apple's success as a personal assault. In a way, it is. The iPad is just another weapon Apple has deployed to give consumers a way to free themselves of your control over their technological choices.
I could go on this way all day. Sorry about the long rant and over-the-top language. It has been building up for a while and I had some free time.
Can we please just stop all of the hyperbolic, straw-man, BS?
Beautifully said on behalf of all us 'non-geeks'. Let the geeks have their Android and Win 7 mobiles and their attendant malware. Perhaps we should rechristen malware on Android/Win 7 mobiles as 'geekware'!
Beautifully said on behalf of all us 'non-geeks'. Let the geeks have their Android and Win 7 mobiles and their attendant malware. Perhaps we should rechristen malware on Android/Win 7 mobiles as 'geekware'!
This was not windows 7 mobile. Windows phone 7 (coming this fall) will be locked down and all apps vetted the same way as on the iPhone.
Oh how some people love the use of the non sequitur ... The problem with your quote from good old Ben is, it is taken totally out of context. Try applying it to a myriad of other situations and it makes zero sense. How about not using condoms on a first date or not checking your equipment like you are told to before a scuba dive or how about ignoring the rules of the road and running red lights... oh wait a minute, idiots do all these things all of the time! Ben must be happy
Back to this subject. No one forces anyone to use an Apple product. Simple enough?
Congrats on a great response to this. I was trying to think of a few analogies myself, and like yours for the most part. I would however argue on the first one about simply not even needing a condom on the "first date". That's just me though. To each his own.
The point can even be argued that Apple provides more choice or "freedom" than any other smartphone manufacturer. You have the ability to jailbreak your iPhone if you so choose and in the process bypass Apple's strict security policies and App store approval mechanisms. On the other hand you can simply use the device as intended by Apple and have the extra security offered by the App store. Apple simply chooses to make the default option the more secure option and to make it impossible for someone to inadvertently run their iPhone in the less secure mode, aka. jailbroken.
If you really have a problem with Apple's App store and security mechanisms, then buy a different phone. If you really like the iPhone but hate the App store, then buy an iPhone and jailbreak it. I'm really not sure where the major problem is here other than people simply wanting to take shots at Apple.
Yet another reason I'm looking for Little Snitch for iPhone OS. I'd like to know what is being sent out; I will determine if it should go through, thank you.
Uh, the iPhone is already designed this way. If you are concerned you are allowing something to be sent from your phone you didn't intend you can check these settings at any time & revoke specific ones or even reset all; it is pretty much little snitch built in. Of course you don't control Apple's own core services but why would you want to? It's a phone & blocking core services could actually screw up your ability to make phone calls or get voicemail.
What a crappy article. Should we have Apple tell us what we can and cannot put on our Macs too, so we never get a virus? This article just reeks of desperate justification for Apple?s policies.
I love Apple as much as the next guy, but damn, I just cannot handle when people claim censorship and gate-keeping are positive things.
"They who give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.? - Benjamin Franklin
Can?t the solution be to let us check a box to install unauthorized apps, a la Android? Seems like the best of both worlds. Apple stops taking heat, and it would be the users liability if stuff like this happened. At the same time, it would allow for some of the amazing Cydia apps to get a broader audience.
Some of us prefer security over absolute freedom. You do realize don't you that you live in a country (wherever you reign from) that has borders, laws, people (police/military) who enforce those laws. I don't think I want that going to a society where everyone is allowed to run around doing whatever they want to whomever they want.
Apple doesn't restrict anyone's freedom by enforcing policies, all they do is monitor & filter the filth. People keep trying to distort reality but there is no evidence to support that setting rules & guidelines for anything causes it to be less free or innovative! On the contrary, with good guidelines technology flourishes.
In all honesty I'm getting so sick of these lame arguments against Apple's approval process. I'm kinda hoping Apple will create their own internet and then anyone who wants security will move there & leave the rest of the web to wallow in it's own malware/viruses.
Comments
I’m wondering where many of you stand on the open-source vs. proprietary software debate. Which is more secure? I believe most of the responses here would align more with being pro-proprietary software in terms of security, which has really been found to be quite the questionable stance.
Hmm, thats a bit of a bait question. But the question isn't that easy. Apple software is a mix of open source(*) and proprietary. It seems that the best way is to find the right balance.
J.
(*) darwin + BSD tools, Webkit, all compiler technology (llgen, gcc etc.) and so on.
Hmm, thats a bit of a bait question. But the question isn't that easy. Apple software is a mix of open source(*) and proprietary. It seems that the best way is to find the right balance.
J.
(*) darwin + BSD tools, Webkit, all compiler technology (llgen, gcc etc.) and so on.
Actually, it's a bit of a silly question. Neither is necessarily or inherently more or less secure than the other. Even if one can produce stats showing that overall, one is x% more secure than the other, that still tells you nothing when deciding between two specific alternatives, or even two alternative sets of software. (Clearly one can produce conjectures that one is more secure, but conjectures don't establish anything in and of themselves.) And it doesn't really have anything to do with the question at hand.
I?m wondering where many of you stand on the open-source vs. proprietary software debate. Which is more secure?
Neither.
This debate is not about freedom vs. limitations. This has nothing to do with average people clicking checkboxes to allow advanced functions, or Flash, or Google Voice, or business models, or any of the nonsense that has been tossed about in this thread.
Those who want to turn the iPhone into a UMPC, I will call the geek elite. For decades, they have been the gatekeepers of technology. To some degree, I am among them. We have decided what the average person should and should not have because we have been the only ones in our community who understood this stuff. We are like neighborhood IT managers. The workplace computer is not a product of what is desired or needed by the cube rat, but the IT person. That's what we have been for family, friends, and coworkers.
The smartphone used to be one of those devices that was only understood and used by the geek elite. Apple comes crashing into the party, producing a smartphone for the rest of us. This type of radical disintermediation made the geek elite obsolete. Suddenly, mom, dad, wife, and coworker were able to grasp a piece of geek tech without the geek. Suddenly, the everyday consumer was in charge of their electronic life.
Normal people don't want GV; geek elites do. Normal people don't even know what Flash is; only geek elites wet their pants over that. Normal people love the iTunes, the App Store, and all the glorious restrictions that go along with them. What geeks see as restrictions have actually set the masses free. Those restrictions have actually given the masses control over their digitals lives. So many of you have completely forgotten what a phone was like before the iPhone. Normal people haven't.
Android, and other iPhone competitors are nothing but the iPhone, but uglier, less intuitive, and brimming with more features that are incomprehensible and difficult to use, just the way the geek elite likes it. They are phones made by geeks, for geeks who have never been able to understand the average person.
Finally, it is time we put to rest, this nonsense about the iPhone needing competition and alternatives. That has always been a load of crap. Let us be perfectly clear. Android and the like are not alternatives to the iPhone. Their ilk have been around for 20 years. The geek elite phones and computers of the world existed without competition. People were forced to use those types of devices and get a lot of help from people they would rather beat up, or not use technology.
The iPhone is the alternative to the geek elite phone. WinMo, Palm, Rim, and others have been around for a long time shoving their techno-crap down our collective throats for ages. The iPhone came along and became the alternative to the traditional smartphone. iPhone users don't need any more choice; the iPhone was and is their choice! They choose a world that does not require people like us to install a safer browser and recommend the best anti-virus. In this brave new world, we are not the majority. We are not the elite sages and gatekeepers. We are not the schoolmasters. And we are not needed!
Please stop pretending that you take up these anti-Apple positions to protect the hapless consumer from the evil empire. The average consumer has more technological freedom than they have ever had, thank you very much. You hold your positions because Apple is disintermediating you out of the equation. When people choose the iPhone, they are rejecting you and your solutions. That is why so many people seem to take Apple's success as a personal assault. In a way, it is. The iPad is just another weapon Apple has deployed to give consumers a way to free themselves of your control over their technological choices.
I could go on this way all day. Sorry about the long rant and over-the-top language. It has been building up for a while and I had some free time.
I could go on this way all day. Sorry about the long rant and over-the-top language. It has been building up for a while and I had some free time.
Free time well spent. An excellent rebuttal.
Can we please just stop all of the hyperbolic, straw-man, BS?
Beautifully said on behalf of all us 'non-geeks'. Let the geeks have their Android and Win 7 mobiles and their attendant malware. Perhaps we should rechristen malware on Android/Win 7 mobiles as 'geekware'!
Beautifully said on behalf of all us 'non-geeks'. Let the geeks have their Android and Win 7 mobiles and their attendant malware. Perhaps we should rechristen malware on Android/Win 7 mobiles as 'geekware'!
This was not windows 7 mobile. Windows phone 7 (coming this fall) will be locked down and all apps vetted the same way as on the iPhone.
Oh how some people love the use of the non sequitur ... The problem with your quote from good old Ben is, it is taken totally out of context. Try applying it to a myriad of other situations and it makes zero sense. How about not using condoms on a first date or not checking your equipment like you are told to before a scuba dive or how about ignoring the rules of the road and running red lights... oh wait a minute, idiots do all these things all of the time! Ben must be happy
Back to this subject. No one forces anyone to use an Apple product. Simple enough?
Congrats on a great response to this. I was trying to think of a few analogies myself, and like yours for the most part. I would however argue on the first one about simply not even needing a condom on the "first date". That's just me though. To each his own.
The point can even be argued that Apple provides more choice or "freedom" than any other smartphone manufacturer. You have the ability to jailbreak your iPhone if you so choose and in the process bypass Apple's strict security policies and App store approval mechanisms. On the other hand you can simply use the device as intended by Apple and have the extra security offered by the App store. Apple simply chooses to make the default option the more secure option and to make it impossible for someone to inadvertently run their iPhone in the less secure mode, aka. jailbroken.
If you really have a problem with Apple's App store and security mechanisms, then buy a different phone. If you really like the iPhone but hate the App store, then buy an iPhone and jailbreak it. I'm really not sure where the major problem is here other than people simply wanting to take shots at Apple.
Yet another reason I'm looking for Little Snitch for iPhone OS. I'd like to know what is being sent out; I will determine if it should go through, thank you.
Uh, the iPhone is already designed this way. If you are concerned you are allowing something to be sent from your phone you didn't intend you can check these settings at any time & revoke specific ones or even reset all; it is pretty much little snitch built in. Of course you don't control Apple's own core services but why would you want to? It's a phone & blocking core services could actually screw up your ability to make phone calls or get voicemail.
What a crappy article. Should we have Apple tell us what we can and cannot put on our Macs too, so we never get a virus? This article just reeks of desperate justification for Apple?s policies.
I love Apple as much as the next guy, but damn, I just cannot handle when people claim censorship and gate-keeping are positive things.
"They who give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.? - Benjamin Franklin
Can?t the solution be to let us check a box to install unauthorized apps, a la Android? Seems like the best of both worlds. Apple stops taking heat, and it would be the users liability if stuff like this happened. At the same time, it would allow for some of the amazing Cydia apps to get a broader audience.
Some of us prefer security over absolute freedom. You do realize don't you that you live in a country (wherever you reign from) that has borders, laws, people (police/military) who enforce those laws. I don't think I want that going to a society where everyone is allowed to run around doing whatever they want to whomever they want.
Apple doesn't restrict anyone's freedom by enforcing policies, all they do is monitor & filter the filth. People keep trying to distort reality but there is no evidence to support that setting rules & guidelines for anything causes it to be less free or innovative! On the contrary, with good guidelines technology flourishes.
In all honesty I'm getting so sick of these lame arguments against Apple's approval process. I'm kinda hoping Apple will create their own internet and then anyone who wants security will move there & leave the rest of the web to wallow in it's own malware/viruses.