Mouse serious question. You are worried about Google and Verizon when it comes to net neutrality and I agree with you there is certainly something going. However what I don't understand is how you are okay and by the way bash me when I get onto Apple for their total control of content and telling us what we are allowed to view or install on devices we own.
Well, the last I checked, Apple's iOS ecosystem isn't the Internet, so, there is no relevancy of one to the other.
Just goes to show while I voice my opinion I am honest....lol. I do agree with Mouse when it comes to Google and Verizon what I would like to know is how is Apple any different?
I would like to also get your opinion on the situation. I buy into the Apple ecosystem just like everyone else here but I don't fool myself into believing they aren't controlling the content that I use for their benefit not mine.
I mean lets be honest, you jailbreak and I root. So clearly we don't except the experience as is, we want to create our own experience.
I would like to also get your opinion on the situation.
I really have no opinion on it. I don?t know enough of what any of them are doing with this data to make an informed opinion at this time. Sure, I want my data private, but I also want it backed up and synced to all my devices and accounts instantly. Security and convenience are opposites. I think I take the necessary steps to protect my data from would be hackers, but protecting from snooping companies or the government, I don?t think that is really achievable unless you complete disconnect, which I?m not willing to do, so until I read something really egregious that can affect my life I?ll probably continue to not worry about it.
Missed your earlier post. In any case I alway have to laugh at the fanboys that say they could care less about market share until its proven there is no way they can gain the top market share. Even though the past has proven market share has nothing to do with profit.
You know something? You are wrong about that. I wanted an iPhone back in 2007 so badly, I didn't care whether it was popular or not. And when it debut, it cost me $600, with a two-year AT&T contract, and I didn't like AT&T/Cingular, but I'll swallow that to get an iPhone... And that that price, it sold poorly. I didn't care. I didn't know Apple wanted market share, so I was expecting it to be forever a niche product. All I cared was that it fulfilled a dream I've had of the perfect mobile convergence device. Apps didn't even exist back then. The big gains in market share took me by surprise; I wasn't expecting it, and frankly, it's not important to me as a fan or user. I just want Apple to be profitable enough that they'll keep doing what they do: make the coolest stuff.
If you're so concerned, then what are you doing here on an Apple internet forum ranting? Shouldn't you be down at your legistator's office yelling and screaming at them? Or maybe outside the FCC with a picket sign?
Don't get me wrong. I, for one, understand what this "deal" could mean for net neutrality. But I'm just not as worked up about it as you are.
I personally see no reason to get my pitchfork and torch out of the closet yet.
Right, because that would totally undermine your, "Google is Great" position that you've locked yourself into. I'll admit you face an uncomfortable choice: continue to support Google now that they've shown their true face, even though you know it's wrong (but don't want to get worked up about it), or admit that you've been wrong all along, and lose face by admitting that Google really is evil (sociopath might be a more accurate term).
Now that Google has shown their hand, the choice to be for or against them is a moral choice for each of us to support good (network neutrality) or evil (Google/Verizon pact). Which you choose says everything about your character.
I really have no opinion on it. I don?t know enough of what any of them are doing with this data to make an informed opinion at this time. Sure, I want my data private, but I also want it backed up and synced to all my devices and accounts instantly. Security and convenience are opposites. I think I take the necessary steps to protect my data from would be hackers, but protecting from snooping companies or the government, I don?t think that is really achievable unless you complete disconnect, which I?m not willing to do, so until I read something really egregious that can affect my life I?ll probably continue to not worry about it.
Good point. I have always looked at it this way anything I post online or view online, all my emails or anything else if anyone wants it that badly they are going to get it. Now that I have anything online all that interesting.
And Staples sold 500 billion paperclips in the same time frame. So what? Why are you comparing Samsung's total sales - including dumb phones that Apple doesn't have an interest in) with Apple's smartphone sales?.
Are they comparing Samsung's total sales? Note that Samsung makes phones with at least the following platforms:
- Android
- Symbian
- WinMo
- Bada
- Likely WinMo7
The discussion is about Android. A big part of Android marketshare comes from Samsung. Samsung is also promoting its own Bada, which could make a big impact.
To see a well educated estimate of smartphone platform marketshare possibilities in the near term if Samsung chooses to go Bada exclusive, here's an interesting viewpoint:
For those who don't read more than 100 words, here's a summary from a global viewpoint from the blog shamelessly copied with minor edits:
Quote:
Symbian without Samsung: 38%
Android without Samsung: 20%
WinMo without Samsung: 14%
MeeGo (Nokia + Intel): 33%
Phone 7 without Samsung: 8%
Bada (Samsung): 20%
Blackberry (RIM): 3%
iPhone iOS (Apple): 2%
Linux Mobile (LiMo Foundation) 2%
Yes it adds up to more than 100% since it tries to analyse the potential each platform has, assumes all phones to be smartphones in the end. Read the full article + comments if you want to dig in deeper.
Actually there is because control is control. The reality is you can't or won't answer the question because they are exactly the same.
So, me controlling what goes on in my home (that's not a metaphor for Apple, btw) is exactly the same as Google/Verizon controlling the Internet? Logically, if control is control, and, "they are exactly the same," that must be the case. This was really not one of your more intelligent comments.
I really have no opinion on it. I don?t know enough of what any of them are doing with this data to make an informed opinion at this time. Sure, I want my data private, but I also want it backed up and synced to all my devices and accounts instantly. Security and convenience are opposites. I think I take the necessary steps to protect my data from would be hackers, but protecting from snooping companies or the government, I don?t think that is really achievable unless you complete disconnect, which I?m not willing to do, so until I read something really egregious that can affect my life I?ll probably continue to not worry about it.
This is exactly what I'm trying to get across to mouse. That if you want to be connected to all your friends in the digital world, that you have to accept some level of loss to your privacy. And to hold yourself accountable for the information you give access to.
If you accept that Google has access to the information you provided, but you make sure that nothing truly damaging is being freely shared, then you can generally move on with life.
You know something? You are wrong about that. I wanted an iPhone back in 2007 so badly, I didn't care whether it was popular or not. And when it debut, it cost me $600, with a two-year AT&T contract, and I didn't like AT&T/Cingular, but I'll swallow that to get an iPhone... And that that price, it sold poorly. I didn't care. I didn't know Apple wanted market share, so I was expecting it to be forever a niche product. All I cared was that it fulfilled a dream I've had of the perfect mobile convergence device. Apps didn't even exist back then. The big gains in market share took me by surprise; I wasn't expecting it, and frankly, it's not important to me as a fan or user. I just want Apple to be profitable enough that they'll keep doing what they do: make the coolest stuff.
So there.
Actually instead of disagreeing with me you proved my point. Something I have posted on these forums a million times is who gives a shit what is popular with everyone else as long as it meets your needs and you are happy with it.
So many on this forum want Appple to "beat" or put out of business Google or Microsoft and bash products they have never even used. People bash Windows when the last time they used Windows was 1990.
My point has always been buy what suits your needs and if you love it who gives a shit how many others buy it. Also if you happent to buy something that doesn't have the Apple brand on it doesn't make you a troll or trader. Maybe that one product just happened to suit your needs better or you just really liked it.
This is exactly what I'm trying to get across to mouse. That if you want to be connected to all your friends in the digital world, that you have to accept some level of loss to your privacy. And to hold yourself accountable for the information you give access to.
If you accept that Google has access to the information you provided, but you make sure that nothing truly damaging is being freely shared, then you can generally move on with life.
This is just BS, how can people be "accountable for the information you give access to," when most of the time they either don't know, or those who gain access are deceptive about what they are doing with it. That's like saying a patient can give informed consent just by being told that they need surgery. And, how much of this information is knowingly provided, as opposed to simply taken or collected?
There is a way to be connected to your friends and not have to give up your privacy. That way is to make Google's entire business model illegal. Privacy equals freedom. Without one, you do not have the other.
Right, because that would totally undermine your, "Google is Great" position that you've locked yourself into. I'll admit you face an uncomfortable choice: continue to support Google now that they've shown their true face, even though you know it's wrong (but don't want to get worked up about it), or admit that you've been wrong all along, and lose face by admitting that Google really is evil (sociopath might be a more accurate term).
Now that Google has shown their hand, the choice to be for or against them is a moral choice for each of us to support good (network neutrality) or evil (Google/Verizon pact). Which you choose says everything about your character.
For my "uncomfortable" choice, I choose to continue to support Google. Every company has its "evils" and that's a given you have to accept. Even Apple is not immune from this. Assigning "evilness" and condemning a company based on morals alone is shaky ground. Who's to say that your definition of moral is any better or worse than my definition?
For me personally, Google has done more "good" than "evil" and made my life a lot easier, which is why I will continue to support them. If that makes you see my character as "morally corrupt", then so be it. To me, you're just an random name tag on an internet forum.
I believe Jetz said it best that you only see things only in black and white.
This is just BS, how can people be "accountable for the information you give access to," when most of the time they either don't know, or those who gain access are deceptive about what they are doing with it. That's like saying a patient can give informed consent just by being told that they need surgery. And, how much of this information is knowingly provided, as opposed to simply taken or collected?
There is a way to be connected to your friends and not have to give up your privacy. That way is to make Google's entire business model illegal. Privacy equals freedom. Without one, you do not have the other.
So you're proposing that no one be held accountable for their own actions? That we should completely trust the other end to keep our information secure?
You post is actually supporting my argument more than refuting it. There are a lot of people out there that will try to get information from you. But it's up to the user to decide whether or not it belongs there in the first place or if the request coming from the other side makes sense.
If you take the precautions for that piece of infomation to not be available to be shared, then most likely it never will be. If you keep all your private information on an external hard drive and don't make it available online, then chances are good that it won't find its way there. Some one would have to physically break into your house and steal the drive, which means that they were going for it in the first place.
Like solipsism said, to guarantee 100% that all your information is kept private, you will have to completely disconnect from the world at large. You give out all your information to all kinds of government agencies all the time. Any one of them can get hacked or the files misplaced or an employee decides to sell it to someone.
By your logic, every single company that has anything to do with the internet has to be made illegal and taken offline, as they all collect information from you on some level. Including Apple, which you seem to hold on a high pedestal and give exception to.
For my "uncomfortable" choice, I choose to continue to support Google. Every company has its "evils" and that's a given you have to accept. Even Apple is not immune from this. Assigning "evilness" and condemning a company based on morals alone is shaky ground. Who's to say that your definition of moral is any better or worse than my definition?
For me personally, Google has done more "good" than "evil" and made my life a lot easier, which is why I will continue to support them. If that makes you see my character as "morally corrupt", then so be it. To me, you're just an random name tag on an internet forum.
I believe Jetz said it best that you only see things only in black and white.
Actually, you are the one framing things in black and white: all companies are evil, so there is no choice as to more or less evil, so it doesn't matter that I support one, because there is no moral difference between the choices. That's a very convenient framework to avoid any sense of moral culpability in your own mind.
So you're proposing that no one be held accountable for their own actions? That we should completely trust the other end to keep our information secure?
You post is actually supporting my argument more than refuting it. There are a lot of people out there that will try to get information from you. But it's up to the user to decide whether or not it belongs there in the first place or if the request coming from the other side makes sense.
If you take the precautions for that piece of infomation to not be available to be shared, then most likely it never will be. If you keep all your private information on an external hard drive and don't make it available online, then chances are good that it won't find its way there. Some one would have to physically break into your house and steal the drive, which means that they were going for it in the first place.
Like solipsism said, to guarantee 100% that all your information is kept private, you will have to completely disconnect from the world at large. You give out all your information to all kinds of government agencies all the time. Any one of them can get hacked or the files misplaced or an employee decides to sell it to someone.
By your logic, every single company that has anything to do with the internet has to be made illegal and taken offline, as they all collect information from you on some level. Including Apple, which you seem to hold on a high pedestal and give exception to.
There you go with more of your black and white reasoning, combined with a dash of misrepresentation on the side. You can try all you want to justify Google's unethical behavior, and your complicity, but, in the end, it's all just rationalization on your part.
And they call Apple fans kool aid drinkers. You guys are completely delusional or none too bright if you actually believe this nonsense you are parroting. Google and Verizon have teamed up for a full frontal assault on net neutrality, and it will end up affecting you, wherever you live, if they get away with it. Face it, "Do no evil," is officially tossed out the window, even the pretense of it.
Did I say I support the agreement or Google's conduct in this matter?
The simple fact is that this could all have been avoided if your government had done it's job and probably regulated net neutrality.
And if you are so pissed about it, I assume that you will be writing to your legislators shortly and demanding that they pass legislation mandating net neutrality, just like many of us (myself included) made submissions to the CRTC when they had public hearings here. But I suspect you care more about bashing Google than anything else.
This whole thread has been about comparing OSes on phones-- mainly smart phones, but some feature phones.
Paraphrasing:
Some say: "We must compare all Android phones to all iOS phones" -- they are right!
Others say: "We must compare all Android devices to all iOS devices" -- they are right!
Still others say: "We must compare a single Android device to a single iOS device" -- they are right.
So what do we gain from this? Confusion? Anything that serves to justify you (or my) position?
Does it make sense? Would it make more sense to compare cameras (or lack thereof)? Accelerometers? RAM? Battery?
The answer to all those questions is I don't think so!
How about multitasking? Syncing? Setup? Security? Ease of app purchase/installation?
This too doesn't really make sense to compare -- but we're getting warmer!
Ignore for the moment, that all apps are not available on all versions of the respective OSes. How about the quality of similar apps and their utility?
That, too, isn't a valid comparison because it doesn't tell the whole story -- but we're really getting hot!
Stay with me now...
One of the things that sets the current genre of phones (and tablets) apart from those of a few years ago is they are easier to use-- you can do much, much more with much less effort.
Why?
Because the Apps are front-and-center, in-your-face?
Maybe... but maybe just the opposite...
are you still with me...
Maybe it is because the OS gets out-of-the-way! The OS recedes into the background and leaves [almost] nothing between you and what you want to do-- the app.
That's what makes these devices different and more useful!
So, are we trying to compare some things (OSes) that aren't there?
Or maybe we are trying to compare how well these OSes perform their disappearing act.
What have we left when the OS disappears?
An App to perform some job. And a User Interface to assist us to get the app to perform our will!
The main purpose of all these mobile os devices is fleeting, spur of the moment: GIDGO -- (Get In; Do it; Get Out)!
How easy that GIDGO is accomplished is the User Experience.
To my mind the User Experience is the thing that makes sense to compare.
Sure, the OS (and its disappearing act), skins, multitasking, widgets, folders, and the quality of the app all contribute to the User Experience.
But the acid test is: can I pick up a device and do my thing:GIDGO with no lengthy training or experimentation. It should be as easy as: say, driving a different make/model rental car, or using a new coffee maker!
I really have no opinion on it. I don?t know enough of what any of them are doing with this data to make an informed opinion at this time. Sure, I want my data private, but I also want it backed up and synced to all my devices and accounts instantly. Security and convenience are opposites. I think I take the necessary steps to protect my data from would be hackers, but protecting from snooping companies or the government, I don?t think that is really achievable unless you complete disconnect, which I?m not willing to do, so until I read something really egregious that can affect my life I?ll probably continue to not worry about it.
A reasonable opinion in line with most of the sane world...except for anonymouse who thinks there's men in black, sent by Google, waiting for him around the corner....
Comments
Mouse [?] You are correct in many ways...
Agreeing with Quadra the other day and now this.
Mouse serious question. You are worried about Google and Verizon when it comes to net neutrality and I agree with you there is certainly something going. However what I don't understand is how you are okay and by the way bash me when I get onto Apple for their total control of content and telling us what we are allowed to view or install on devices we own.
Well, the last I checked, Apple's iOS ecosystem isn't the Internet, so, there is no relevancy of one to the other.
Agreeing with Quadra the other day and now this.
Just goes to show while I voice my opinion I am honest....lol. I do agree with Mouse when it comes to Google and Verizon what I would like to know is how is Apple any different?
I would like to also get your opinion on the situation. I buy into the Apple ecosystem just like everyone else here but I don't fool myself into believing they aren't controlling the content that I use for their benefit not mine.
I mean lets be honest, you jailbreak and I root. So clearly we don't except the experience as is, we want to create our own experience.
Well, the last I checked, Apple's iOS ecosystem isn't the Internet, so, there is no relevancy of one to the other.
Actually there is because control is control. The reality is you can't or won't answer the question because they are exactly the same.
I would like to also get your opinion on the situation.
I really have no opinion on it. I don?t know enough of what any of them are doing with this data to make an informed opinion at this time. Sure, I want my data private, but I also want it backed up and synced to all my devices and accounts instantly. Security and convenience are opposites. I think I take the necessary steps to protect my data from would be hackers, but protecting from snooping companies or the government, I don?t think that is really achievable unless you complete disconnect, which I?m not willing to do, so until I read something really egregious that can affect my life I?ll probably continue to not worry about it.
Missed your earlier post. In any case I alway have to laugh at the fanboys that say they could care less about market share until its proven there is no way they can gain the top market share. Even though the past has proven market share has nothing to do with profit.
You know something? You are wrong about that. I wanted an iPhone back in 2007 so badly, I didn't care whether it was popular or not. And when it debut, it cost me $600, with a two-year AT&T contract, and I didn't like AT&T/Cingular, but I'll swallow that to get an iPhone... And that that price, it sold poorly. I didn't care. I didn't know Apple wanted market share, so I was expecting it to be forever a niche product. All I cared was that it fulfilled a dream I've had of the perfect mobile convergence device. Apps didn't even exist back then. The big gains in market share took me by surprise; I wasn't expecting it, and frankly, it's not important to me as a fan or user. I just want Apple to be profitable enough that they'll keep doing what they do: make the coolest stuff.
So there.
If you're so concerned, then what are you doing here on an Apple internet forum ranting? Shouldn't you be down at your legistator's office yelling and screaming at them? Or maybe outside the FCC with a picket sign?
Don't get me wrong. I, for one, understand what this "deal" could mean for net neutrality. But I'm just not as worked up about it as you are.
I personally see no reason to get my pitchfork and torch out of the closet yet.
Right, because that would totally undermine your, "Google is Great" position that you've locked yourself into. I'll admit you face an uncomfortable choice: continue to support Google now that they've shown their true face, even though you know it's wrong (but don't want to get worked up about it), or admit that you've been wrong all along, and lose face by admitting that Google really is evil (sociopath might be a more accurate term).
Now that Google has shown their hand, the choice to be for or against them is a moral choice for each of us to support good (network neutrality) or evil (Google/Verizon pact). Which you choose says everything about your character.
I really have no opinion on it. I don?t know enough of what any of them are doing with this data to make an informed opinion at this time. Sure, I want my data private, but I also want it backed up and synced to all my devices and accounts instantly. Security and convenience are opposites. I think I take the necessary steps to protect my data from would be hackers, but protecting from snooping companies or the government, I don?t think that is really achievable unless you complete disconnect, which I?m not willing to do, so until I read something really egregious that can affect my life I?ll probably continue to not worry about it.
Good point. I have always looked at it this way anything I post online or view online, all my emails or anything else if anyone wants it that badly they are going to get it. Now that I have anything online all that interesting.
And Staples sold 500 billion paperclips in the same time frame. So what? Why are you comparing Samsung's total sales - including dumb phones that Apple doesn't have an interest in) with Apple's smartphone sales?.
Are they comparing Samsung's total sales? Note that Samsung makes phones with at least the following platforms:
- Android
- Symbian
- WinMo
- Bada
- Likely WinMo7
The discussion is about Android. A big part of Android marketshare comes from Samsung. Samsung is also promoting its own Bada, which could make a big impact.
To see a well educated estimate of smartphone platform marketshare possibilities in the near term if Samsung chooses to go Bada exclusive, here's an interesting viewpoint:
http://communities-dominate.blogs.co...artphones.html
For those who don't read more than 100 words, here's a summary from a global viewpoint from the blog shamelessly copied with minor edits:
Symbian without Samsung: 38%
Android without Samsung: 20%
WinMo without Samsung: 14%
MeeGo (Nokia + Intel): 33%
Phone 7 without Samsung: 8%
Bada (Samsung): 20%
Blackberry (RIM): 3%
iPhone iOS (Apple): 2%
Linux Mobile (LiMo Foundation) 2%
Yes it adds up to more than 100% since it tries to analyse the potential each platform has, assumes all phones to be smartphones in the end. Read the full article + comments if you want to dig in deeper.
Regs, Jarkko
Actually there is because control is control. The reality is you can't or won't answer the question because they are exactly the same.
So, me controlling what goes on in my home (that's not a metaphor for Apple, btw) is exactly the same as Google/Verizon controlling the Internet? Logically, if control is control, and, "they are exactly the same," that must be the case. This was really not one of your more intelligent comments.
I really have no opinion on it. I don?t know enough of what any of them are doing with this data to make an informed opinion at this time. Sure, I want my data private, but I also want it backed up and synced to all my devices and accounts instantly. Security and convenience are opposites. I think I take the necessary steps to protect my data from would be hackers, but protecting from snooping companies or the government, I don?t think that is really achievable unless you complete disconnect, which I?m not willing to do, so until I read something really egregious that can affect my life I?ll probably continue to not worry about it.
This is exactly what I'm trying to get across to mouse. That if you want to be connected to all your friends in the digital world, that you have to accept some level of loss to your privacy. And to hold yourself accountable for the information you give access to.
If you accept that Google has access to the information you provided, but you make sure that nothing truly damaging is being freely shared, then you can generally move on with life.
You know something? You are wrong about that. I wanted an iPhone back in 2007 so badly, I didn't care whether it was popular or not. And when it debut, it cost me $600, with a two-year AT&T contract, and I didn't like AT&T/Cingular, but I'll swallow that to get an iPhone... And that that price, it sold poorly. I didn't care. I didn't know Apple wanted market share, so I was expecting it to be forever a niche product. All I cared was that it fulfilled a dream I've had of the perfect mobile convergence device. Apps didn't even exist back then. The big gains in market share took me by surprise; I wasn't expecting it, and frankly, it's not important to me as a fan or user. I just want Apple to be profitable enough that they'll keep doing what they do: make the coolest stuff.
So there.
Actually instead of disagreeing with me you proved my point. Something I have posted on these forums a million times is who gives a shit what is popular with everyone else as long as it meets your needs and you are happy with it.
So many on this forum want Appple to "beat" or put out of business Google or Microsoft and bash products they have never even used. People bash Windows when the last time they used Windows was 1990.
My point has always been buy what suits your needs and if you love it who gives a shit how many others buy it. Also if you happent to buy something that doesn't have the Apple brand on it doesn't make you a troll or trader. Maybe that one product just happened to suit your needs better or you just really liked it.
So I say back to you, Good for you.
This is exactly what I'm trying to get across to mouse. That if you want to be connected to all your friends in the digital world, that you have to accept some level of loss to your privacy. And to hold yourself accountable for the information you give access to.
If you accept that Google has access to the information you provided, but you make sure that nothing truly damaging is being freely shared, then you can generally move on with life.
This is just BS, how can people be "accountable for the information you give access to," when most of the time they either don't know, or those who gain access are deceptive about what they are doing with it. That's like saying a patient can give informed consent just by being told that they need surgery. And, how much of this information is knowingly provided, as opposed to simply taken or collected?
There is a way to be connected to your friends and not have to give up your privacy. That way is to make Google's entire business model illegal. Privacy equals freedom. Without one, you do not have the other.
Right, because that would totally undermine your, "Google is Great" position that you've locked yourself into. I'll admit you face an uncomfortable choice: continue to support Google now that they've shown their true face, even though you know it's wrong (but don't want to get worked up about it), or admit that you've been wrong all along, and lose face by admitting that Google really is evil (sociopath might be a more accurate term).
Now that Google has shown their hand, the choice to be for or against them is a moral choice for each of us to support good (network neutrality) or evil (Google/Verizon pact). Which you choose says everything about your character.
For my "uncomfortable" choice, I choose to continue to support Google. Every company has its "evils" and that's a given you have to accept. Even Apple is not immune from this. Assigning "evilness" and condemning a company based on morals alone is shaky ground. Who's to say that your definition of moral is any better or worse than my definition?
For me personally, Google has done more "good" than "evil" and made my life a lot easier, which is why I will continue to support them. If that makes you see my character as "morally corrupt", then so be it. To me, you're just an random name tag on an internet forum.
I believe Jetz said it best that you only see things only in black and white.
This is just BS, how can people be "accountable for the information you give access to," when most of the time they either don't know, or those who gain access are deceptive about what they are doing with it. That's like saying a patient can give informed consent just by being told that they need surgery. And, how much of this information is knowingly provided, as opposed to simply taken or collected?
There is a way to be connected to your friends and not have to give up your privacy. That way is to make Google's entire business model illegal. Privacy equals freedom. Without one, you do not have the other.
So you're proposing that no one be held accountable for their own actions? That we should completely trust the other end to keep our information secure?
You post is actually supporting my argument more than refuting it. There are a lot of people out there that will try to get information from you. But it's up to the user to decide whether or not it belongs there in the first place or if the request coming from the other side makes sense.
If you take the precautions for that piece of infomation to not be available to be shared, then most likely it never will be. If you keep all your private information on an external hard drive and don't make it available online, then chances are good that it won't find its way there. Some one would have to physically break into your house and steal the drive, which means that they were going for it in the first place.
Like solipsism said, to guarantee 100% that all your information is kept private, you will have to completely disconnect from the world at large. You give out all your information to all kinds of government agencies all the time. Any one of them can get hacked or the files misplaced or an employee decides to sell it to someone.
By your logic, every single company that has anything to do with the internet has to be made illegal and taken offline, as they all collect information from you on some level. Including Apple, which you seem to hold on a high pedestal and give exception to.
For my "uncomfortable" choice, I choose to continue to support Google. Every company has its "evils" and that's a given you have to accept. Even Apple is not immune from this. Assigning "evilness" and condemning a company based on morals alone is shaky ground. Who's to say that your definition of moral is any better or worse than my definition?
For me personally, Google has done more "good" than "evil" and made my life a lot easier, which is why I will continue to support them. If that makes you see my character as "morally corrupt", then so be it. To me, you're just an random name tag on an internet forum.
I believe Jetz said it best that you only see things only in black and white.
Actually, you are the one framing things in black and white: all companies are evil, so there is no choice as to more or less evil, so it doesn't matter that I support one, because there is no moral difference between the choices. That's a very convenient framework to avoid any sense of moral culpability in your own mind.
So you're proposing that no one be held accountable for their own actions? That we should completely trust the other end to keep our information secure?
You post is actually supporting my argument more than refuting it. There are a lot of people out there that will try to get information from you. But it's up to the user to decide whether or not it belongs there in the first place or if the request coming from the other side makes sense.
If you take the precautions for that piece of infomation to not be available to be shared, then most likely it never will be. If you keep all your private information on an external hard drive and don't make it available online, then chances are good that it won't find its way there. Some one would have to physically break into your house and steal the drive, which means that they were going for it in the first place.
Like solipsism said, to guarantee 100% that all your information is kept private, you will have to completely disconnect from the world at large. You give out all your information to all kinds of government agencies all the time. Any one of them can get hacked or the files misplaced or an employee decides to sell it to someone.
By your logic, every single company that has anything to do with the internet has to be made illegal and taken offline, as they all collect information from you on some level. Including Apple, which you seem to hold on a high pedestal and give exception to.
There you go with more of your black and white reasoning, combined with a dash of misrepresentation on the side. You can try all you want to justify Google's unethical behavior, and your complicity, but, in the end, it's all just rationalization on your part.
And they call Apple fans kool aid drinkers. You guys are completely delusional or none too bright if you actually believe this nonsense you are parroting. Google and Verizon have teamed up for a full frontal assault on net neutrality, and it will end up affecting you, wherever you live, if they get away with it. Face it, "Do no evil," is officially tossed out the window, even the pretense of it.
Did I say I support the agreement or Google's conduct in this matter?
The simple fact is that this could all have been avoided if your government had done it's job and probably regulated net neutrality.
And if you are so pissed about it, I assume that you will be writing to your legislators shortly and demanding that they pass legislation mandating net neutrality, just like many of us (myself included) made submissions to the CRTC when they had public hearings here. But I suspect you care more about bashing Google than anything else.
This whole thread has been about comparing OSes on phones-- mainly smart phones, but some feature phones.
Paraphrasing:
Some say: "We must compare all Android phones to all iOS phones" -- they are right!
Others say: "We must compare all Android devices to all iOS devices" -- they are right!
Still others say: "We must compare a single Android device to a single iOS device" -- they are right.
So what do we gain from this? Confusion? Anything that serves to justify you (or my) position?
Does it make sense? Would it make more sense to compare cameras (or lack thereof)? Accelerometers? RAM? Battery?
The answer to all those questions is I don't think so!
How about multitasking? Syncing? Setup? Security? Ease of app purchase/installation?
This too doesn't really make sense to compare -- but we're getting warmer!
Ignore for the moment, that all apps are not available on all versions of the respective OSes. How about the quality of similar apps and their utility?
That, too, isn't a valid comparison because it doesn't tell the whole story -- but we're really getting hot!
Stay with me now...
One of the things that sets the current genre of phones (and tablets) apart from those of a few years ago is they are easier to use-- you can do much, much more with much less effort.
Why?
Because the Apps are front-and-center, in-your-face?
Maybe... but maybe just the opposite...
are you still with me...
Maybe it is because the OS gets out-of-the-way! The OS recedes into the background and leaves [almost] nothing between you and what you want to do-- the app.
That's what makes these devices different and more useful!
So, are we trying to compare some things (OSes) that aren't there?
Or maybe we are trying to compare how well these OSes perform their disappearing act.
What have we left when the OS disappears?
An App to perform some job. And a User Interface to assist us to get the app to perform our will!
The main purpose of all these mobile os devices is fleeting, spur of the moment: GIDGO -- (Get In; Do it; Get Out)!
How easy that GIDGO is accomplished is the User Experience.
To my mind the User Experience is the thing that makes sense to compare.
Sure, the OS (and its disappearing act), skins, multitasking, widgets, folders, and the quality of the app all contribute to the User Experience.
But the acid test is: can I pick up a device and do my thing: GIDGO with no lengthy training or experimentation. It should be as easy as: say, driving a different make/model rental car, or using a new coffee maker!
,
I really have no opinion on it. I don?t know enough of what any of them are doing with this data to make an informed opinion at this time. Sure, I want my data private, but I also want it backed up and synced to all my devices and accounts instantly. Security and convenience are opposites. I think I take the necessary steps to protect my data from would be hackers, but protecting from snooping companies or the government, I don?t think that is really achievable unless you complete disconnect, which I?m not willing to do, so until I read something really egregious that can affect my life I?ll probably continue to not worry about it.
A reasonable opinion in line with most of the sane world...except for anonymouse who thinks there's men in black, sent by Google, waiting for him around the corner....