Actually, Ubuntu Edge has at least four ways it may be relevant here:
1. Its design is a radical departure from iOS and Android, arguably making better use of screen space by not having always-present elements like the notification bar. During this period in which Apple is exploring ways to simplify their design, the Ubuntu team's initiatives may provide some guidance, or at least counterpoint to support iOS' direction.
2. As an OS designed to work across all device types, from mobile to the desktop to TVs, Ubuntu challenges Apple's dual-OS strategy, with a much more cohesive design than Microsoft's.
3. Ubuntu is the third most popular desktop OS in the world, with more users today than Apple had when Steve returned. To dismiss them without examination risks missing what could well be one of the most promising competitors Apple's had in years. If nothing else, Canonical's budding relationships with Chinese carriers, not to mention China standardizing on an Ubuntu fork, may boost it in an important market where Apple is losing ground.
Sure, on the desktop both Apple and Ubuntu are niche players in a world where Microsoft still controls almost 90% of the market, and whether Ubuntu gets any significant traction in mobile remains to be seen.
But viewed against the rather constant stream of anti-Google/anti-Samsung/anti-Microsoft/anti-Nokia/anti-EnemyDuJour articles here, there's little argument to be made that it's not at least as relevant as a good many of them.
It doesn't have a Retina Display or a glowing Apple in the back, I hate it.:D
Did you read the article? How is Google going to scan apps on the devices that never plug into Google Play, the very users at risk here?
From the article:
"It's the widespread launch of a universal app-scanning system -- a system that watches your device for any new application, even one loaded directly onto the device ("sideloaded") from outside of the Google Play Store, and instantly checks the app for malicious or potentially harmful code.
That's huge. And while we've been busy focusing on new devices and fun features, Google's been busy making sure every Android user has that system on his phone -- whether he realizes it or not.
Google initially launched the feature, known as Verify Apps, with Android 4.2 last November (Android VP of Engineering Hiroshi Lockheimer discussed it with me exclusively at the time). Now, Google has pulled the program out of the OS and made it automatically available to every device running Android 2.3 or higher. That covers almost every phone and tablet out there -- about 95 percent of the actively running products, according to Google's latest platform measurements."
Searching for the word "censorship" there turns up no results. Unless you can help us find where the blogger clearly states he's "into censorship" or "opposed to free speech", it would seem your post here risks being flagged for ad hominem against an author.
While on the topic of censorship, it appears your post disappeared.
Why are Android fans like this blogger so into censorship and so opposed to open information and free speech?
Searching for the word "censorship" there turns up no results. Unless you can help us find where the blogger clearly states he's "into censorship" or "opposed to free speech", it would seem your post here risks being flagged for ad hominem against an author.
That blogger isn't an author on this forum and ad-homs are strongly offensive remarks made towards people. Instead of obsessing over trying to bend rules to meet your agenda, you could try just being a productive member of the forum.
While on the topic of censorship, it appears your post disappeared.
It was off-topic. Android fans have a habit of skewing topics into discussions about particular phones and it has nothing to do with the discussion at hand. The discussion is about Android malware.
So every time an article is written about Samsung and Apple, there's complaints about AI being "Samsung Insider!!!" But when some inconsequential hobbyist Linux distro which has released a series of initiatives that have never gone anywhere, does a kickstarter for an extreme niche Linux smartphone concept that has no relevance to Apple and its users whatsoever, it's something AI should be covering in detail.
Seems my earlier reply didn't survive, even though it was polite, broke no known rules, and received no notice of infraction. Given that, we'll have to assume it was a database glitch so I'll offer the favor of a second attempt:
There are at least four way Ubuntu Edge is relevant here:
1. Its design is a radical departure from both iOS and Android, arguably making better use of screen space by avoiding always-present items like the notification bar. At a time when Apple is exploring ways to streamline iOS, Ubuntu may offer guidance, or at least a counterpoint to further justify Apple's direction.
2. Ubuntu's strategy of a single OS across all device types, from the desktop to mobile to TVs, challenges Apple's dual-OS strategy, but more cohesively than Win8. As ARM gets more powerful and x86 gets more power-efficient, device capabilities continue an ever greater overlap, offering an opportunity for review of a device-specific OS strategy over the long term.
3. Ubuntu is the world's third most popular desktop OS. Sure, both Mac and Ubuntu are niche players on the desktop, where Microsoft continues to control nearly 90% of the market. But with Canonical's budding relationships with Chinese carriers an China's move to standardize on an Ubuntu fork, it may well be worthwhile to at least consider the prospects in an important market where Apple has been losing ground. All things considered, Ubuntu may well become Apple's strongest competitor after Android.
4. Any reasonable person can admit that the specs for the Ubuntu Edge are pretty impressive.
It remains to be seen whether Ubuntu will indeed fulfill what appears to be a potentially promising future. But in light of the great many articles here in AppleInsider about other companies that aren't Apple, this would seem no less relevant.
PS: With LAKings33's note above about the disappearance of my post, given the polite and professional tone of this post I trust that any action toward its removal would at least meet with a private note describing the rules it's presumed to have violated. Removing posts without letting users know why prevents a user from knowing how to meet expectations.
That blogger isn't an author on this forum and ad-homs are strongly offensive remarks made towards people. Instead of obsessing over trying to bend rules to meet your agenda, you could try just being a productive member of the forum.
I trust neither of us wants to appear to be trying to bend rules to fit an agenda, so could you kindly help me understand the bold portion above in light of your post #86?
Quote:
It was off-topic.
Given the widespread prevalence of off-topic posts here, I wasn't aware there was a rule against it. Trusting that any such rule would be applied equally to all members, can you please point me to the rules so that I can better comply with them?
PS: With LAKings33's note above about the disappearance of my post, given the polite and professional tone of this post I trust that any action toward its removal would at least meet with a private note describing the rules it's presumed to have violated. Removing posts without letting users know why prevents a user from knowing how to meet expectations.
I didn't think your post violated any rules, it might have been a glitch. I've seen entire pages disappear. (Edit) Oh, well if Marvin the Martian did it then it must have been against the rules, strange, maybe if you would have added a shutup and go away at the end of the post it would have stayed in.:D
That's silly, that would mean the user never uses the device with the internet or they sideload all apps in which case it's a waste of time because they'll have to hunt down all of the individual apk's. If you have apps, your using Google Play, maybe not for everything but even sideloaded apps are registered in Google Play upon installation unless it's a custom app, your reaching here.
I think he's referring to devices that don't get their apps from Google Play, like the Kindle Fire or the various Chinese OS's based on AOSP.
I think he's referring to devices that don't get their apps from Google Play, like the Kindle Fire or the various Chinese OS's based on AOSP.
Okay fair enough, then their on their own. It's like when people who side-load apps on their iPad's or use Cydia, they can't blame Apple if they* get a malware. The majority of the Malware comes from questionable apps, if a user sticks with main stream apps they will never have a problem. I have never had a virus or malware on any of my devices since the Michelangelo virus in 91 because I follow safe practices. If I run a questionable applications I do so in a virtual environment where the container file is deleted when I'm finished.
maybe if you would have added a shutup and go away at the end of the post it would have stayed in.
Is "shut up and go away" allowed? I always report it for spam when I see it because that's what it is. If it is allowed, would people be able to respond to the shut up and go away posts with a shut up and go away of their own? It's not my style to respond to spam by adding more spam and I certainly don't condone feeding trolls, but it does make me wonder.
Is "shut up and go away" allowed? I always report it for spam when I see it because that's what it is. If it is allowed, would people be able to respond to the shut up and go away posts with a shut up and go away of their own? It's not my style to respond to spam by adding more spam and I certainly don't condone feeding trolls, but it does make me wonder.
I didn't think your post violated any rules, it might have been a glitch. I've seen entire pages disappear. (Edit) Oh, well if Marvin the Martian did it then it must have been against the rules, strange, maybe if you would have added a shutup and go away at the end of the post it would have stayed in.:D
The topic of the thread is Android malware. Someone made a comment about it being better to discuss phones like the Ubuntu Edge than malware. As mentioned earlier, if people want to talk about those things, there are other forums better suited for it. The degree of how much off-topic a post is can vary but a post solely about the Ubuntu Edge has nothing to do with this thread and was removed. Macrulez decided to repost it anyway so got an infraction.
Is "shut up and go away" allowed? I always report it for spam when I see it because that's what it is. If it is allowed, would people be able to respond to the shut up and go away posts with a shut up and go away of their own?
"shut up and go away" is kind of abusive but it's not really insulting the character of the poster so it doesn't qualify as an ad-hom but the comments are deletion-worthy just like off-topic posts. Infraction-worthy comments include ones that are used to attack a commenter rather than a comment.
There's context to every comment that changes things a bit. For example, if two people are arguing and one happens to just step over the line, it's not right to punish one and not the other but the first didn't break the rules so that usually results in bulk deletions of the argument. In cases where new posters come here to stir up trouble, if someone tells them to shut up and go away, the new poster effectively started the argument if their comment is worded in a way to annoy others. Some people are more sensitive to newbie comments and some comments get misinterpreted so in those cases the responses get removed.
People have to remember that this is a forum primarily for Apple fans so the rules have to be weighted in favour of the purpose of the forum. If people just want to promote Google or Android all the time, there are forums for this elsewhere. If people do it politely enough and stay on-topic (some topics such as this one are about Android), the discussion can stay healthy.
Oh my gosh, why? I didn't realize that till just now. :???: (Edit) Never mind I see now, because he re-posted that thing about about that thing, I won't repeat it since it got a person banned, a little harsh I would say or don't say depending if what I say will get me banned too . I thought, he thought it was deleted because of a database error and didn't do it out of despite. I don't know, Marvin did you at least talk to him outside of the thread or is this a zero tolerance kind of thing. I'm scared now, I always thought that you only got banned for being a douche, not talking about tech.
He got a demerit What does that mean, sent to his room without supper.
You joke, but in reality he was banned.
Hence the "Banned" under his user name.
People get infraction points for incidents of breaking the rules. The number of points varies depending on the severity of the rule-breaking. When people have enough infraction points, they start to get bans. They start out as temporary bans and if the behaviour doesn't improve in a given period of time, they eventually lead to a permanent ban. The poster in question has said in the past he doesn't like the forum or the people on it so his motive seems to be to stir up trouble here and he has recently been regularly deleting all his posts, presumably to hide the evidence of it, even though mods can still see them. It's very odd, he seems to be obsessed with making sure he doesn't get punished for making irritating comments but rather than just make nicer comments, he's trying to find ways to get away with them. He's also been flagging loads of posts made by members he doesn't like because he thinks he's being treated unfairly.
I don't know, Marvin did you at least talk to him outside of the thread or is this a zero tolerance kind of thing. I'm scared now, I always thought that you only got banned for being a douche, not talking about tech.
No need to worry; like I say, the infractions just mount up with repeated incidents of misbehaviour and temporary bans come first. Some forum members are in favour of the zero tolerance banning approach and it has its benefits but it leads to what you are suggesting, which is that people can't be certain if they will just have their account switched off and it can become personal that way. The infraction system is there so that it gives people a chance to change their ways and if someone gets banned, there's a record of the incidents for why they were banned so someone else can check it.
People get infraction points for incidents of breaking the rules. The number of points varies depending on the severity of the rule-breaking. When people have enough infraction points, they start to get bans. They start out as temporary bans and if the behaviour doesn't improve in a given period of time, they eventually lead to a permanent ban. The poster in question has said in the past he doesn't like the forum or the people on it so his motive seems to be to stir up trouble here and he has recently been regularly deleting all his posts, presumably to hide the evidence of it, even though mods can still see them. It's very odd, he seems to be obsessed with making sure he doesn't get punished for making irritating comments but rather than just make nicer comments, he's trying to find ways to get away with them. He's also been flagging loads of posts made by members he doesn't like because he thinks he's being treated unfairly.
No need to worry; like I say, the infractions just mount up with repeated incidents of misbehaviour and temporary bans come first. Some forum members are in favour of the zero tolerance banning approach and it has its benefits but it leads to what you are suggesting, which is that people can't be certain if they will just have their account switched off and it can become personal that way. The infraction system is there so that it gives people a chance to change their ways and if someone gets banned, there's a record of the incidents for why they were banned so someone else can check it.
Fair enough and have I mentioned how handsome you look today.
Hey Marvin, where do you keep the reasons why someone was banned, just curious.
Comments
It doesn't have a Retina Display or a glowing Apple in the back, I hate it.:D
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections
Did you read the article? How is Google going to scan apps on the devices that never plug into Google Play, the very users at risk here?
From the article:
"It's the widespread launch of a universal app-scanning system -- a system that watches your device for any new application, even one loaded directly onto the device ("sideloaded") from outside of the Google Play Store, and instantly checks the app for malicious or potentially harmful code.
That's huge. And while we've been busy focusing on new devices and fun features, Google's been busy making sure every Android user has that system on his phone -- whether he realizes it or not.
Google initially launched the feature, known as Verify Apps, with Android 4.2 last November (Android VP of Engineering Hiroshi Lockheimer discussed it with me exclusively at the time). Now, Google has pulled the program out of the OS and made it automatically available to every device running Android 2.3 or higher. That covers almost every phone and tablet out there -- about 95 percent of the actively running products, according to Google's latest platform measurements."
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez
Searching for the word "censorship" there turns up no results. Unless you can help us find where the blogger clearly states he's "into censorship" or "opposed to free speech", it would seem your post here risks being flagged for ad hominem against an author.
While on the topic of censorship, it appears your post disappeared.
That blogger isn't an author on this forum and ad-homs are strongly offensive remarks made towards people. Instead of obsessing over trying to bend rules to meet your agenda, you could try just being a productive member of the forum.
It was off-topic. Android fans have a habit of skewing topics into discussions about particular phones and it has nothing to do with the discussion at hand. The discussion is about Android malware.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections
So every time an article is written about Samsung and Apple, there's complaints about AI being "Samsung Insider!!!" But when some inconsequential hobbyist Linux distro which has released a series of initiatives that have never gone anywhere, does a kickstarter for an extreme niche Linux smartphone concept that has no relevance to Apple and its users whatsoever, it's something AI should be covering in detail.
Seems my earlier reply didn't survive, even though it was polite, broke no known rules, and received no notice of infraction. Given that, we'll have to assume it was a database glitch so I'll offer the favor of a second attempt:
There are at least four way Ubuntu Edge is relevant here:
1. Its design is a radical departure from both iOS and Android, arguably making better use of screen space by avoiding always-present items like the notification bar. At a time when Apple is exploring ways to streamline iOS, Ubuntu may offer guidance, or at least a counterpoint to further justify Apple's direction.
2. Ubuntu's strategy of a single OS across all device types, from the desktop to mobile to TVs, challenges Apple's dual-OS strategy, but more cohesively than Win8. As ARM gets more powerful and x86 gets more power-efficient, device capabilities continue an ever greater overlap, offering an opportunity for review of a device-specific OS strategy over the long term.
3. Ubuntu is the world's third most popular desktop OS. Sure, both Mac and Ubuntu are niche players on the desktop, where Microsoft continues to control nearly 90% of the market. But with Canonical's budding relationships with Chinese carriers an China's move to standardize on an Ubuntu fork, it may well be worthwhile to at least consider the prospects in an important market where Apple has been losing ground. All things considered, Ubuntu may well become Apple's strongest competitor after Android.
4. Any reasonable person can admit that the specs for the Ubuntu Edge are pretty impressive.
It remains to be seen whether Ubuntu will indeed fulfill what appears to be a potentially promising future. But in light of the great many articles here in AppleInsider about other companies that aren't Apple, this would seem no less relevant.
PS: With LAKings33's note above about the disappearance of my post, given the polite and professional tone of this post I trust that any action toward its removal would at least meet with a private note describing the rules it's presumed to have violated. Removing posts without letting users know why prevents a user from knowing how to meet expectations.
Yeah, you'll go blind.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
That blogger isn't an author on this forum and ad-homs are strongly offensive remarks made towards people. Instead of obsessing over trying to bend rules to meet your agenda, you could try just being a productive member of the forum.
I trust neither of us wants to appear to be trying to bend rules to fit an agenda, so could you kindly help me understand the bold portion above in light of your post #86?
Quote:
It was off-topic.
Given the widespread prevalence of off-topic posts here, I wasn't aware there was a rule against it. Trusting that any such rule would be applied equally to all members, can you please point me to the rules so that I can better comply with them?
I didn't think your post violated any rules, it might have been a glitch. I've seen entire pages disappear. (Edit) Oh, well if Marvin the Martian did it then it must have been against the rules, strange, maybe if you would have added a shutup and go away at the end of the post it would have stayed in.:D
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic
That's silly, that would mean the user never uses the device with the internet or they sideload all apps in which case it's a waste of time because they'll have to hunt down all of the individual apk's. If you have apps, your using Google Play, maybe not for everything but even sideloaded apps are registered in Google Play upon installation unless it's a custom app, your reaching here.
I think he's referring to devices that don't get their apps from Google Play, like the Kindle Fire or the various Chinese OS's based on AOSP.
Okay fair enough, then their on their own. It's like when people who side-load apps on their iPad's or use Cydia, they can't blame Apple if they* get a malware. The majority of the Malware comes from questionable apps, if a user sticks with main stream apps they will never have a problem. I have never had a virus or malware on any of my devices since the Michelangelo virus in 91 because I follow safe practices. If I run a questionable applications I do so in a virtual environment where the container file is deleted when I'm finished.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic
maybe if you would have added a shutup and go away at the end of the post it would have stayed in.
Is "shut up and go away" allowed? I always report it for spam when I see it because that's what it is. If it is allowed, would people be able to respond to the shut up and go away posts with a shut up and go away of their own? It's not my style to respond to spam by adding more spam and I certainly don't condone feeding trolls, but it does make me wonder.
I don't know, I was just being silly.
The topic of the thread is Android malware. Someone made a comment about it being better to discuss phones like the Ubuntu Edge than malware. As mentioned earlier, if people want to talk about those things, there are other forums better suited for it. The degree of how much off-topic a post is can vary but a post solely about the Ubuntu Edge has nothing to do with this thread and was removed. Macrulez decided to repost it anyway so got an infraction.
"shut up and go away" is kind of abusive but it's not really insulting the character of the poster so it doesn't qualify as an ad-hom but the comments are deletion-worthy just like off-topic posts. Infraction-worthy comments include ones that are used to attack a commenter rather than a comment.
There's context to every comment that changes things a bit. For example, if two people are arguing and one happens to just step over the line, it's not right to punish one and not the other but the first didn't break the rules so that usually results in bulk deletions of the argument. In cases where new posters come here to stir up trouble, if someone tells them to shut up and go away, the new poster effectively started the argument if their comment is worded in a way to annoy others. Some people are more sensitive to newbie comments and some comments get misinterpreted so in those cases the responses get removed.
People have to remember that this is a forum primarily for Apple fans so the rules have to be weighted in favour of the purpose of the forum. If people just want to promote Google or Android all the time, there are forums for this elsewhere. If people do it politely enough and stay on-topic (some topics such as this one are about Android), the discussion can stay healthy.
He got a demerit
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic
He got a demerit
You joke, but in reality he was banned.
Hence the "Banned" under his user name.
Oh my gosh, why? I didn't realize that till just now. :???: (Edit) Never mind I see now, because he re-posted that thing about about that thing, I won't repeat it since it got a person banned, a little harsh I would say or don't say depending if what I say will get me banned too
People get infraction points for incidents of breaking the rules. The number of points varies depending on the severity of the rule-breaking. When people have enough infraction points, they start to get bans. They start out as temporary bans and if the behaviour doesn't improve in a given period of time, they eventually lead to a permanent ban. The poster in question has said in the past he doesn't like the forum or the people on it so his motive seems to be to stir up trouble here and he has recently been regularly deleting all his posts, presumably to hide the evidence of it, even though mods can still see them. It's very odd, he seems to be obsessed with making sure he doesn't get punished for making irritating comments but rather than just make nicer comments, he's trying to find ways to get away with them. He's also been flagging loads of posts made by members he doesn't like because he thinks he's being treated unfairly.
No need to worry; like I say, the infractions just mount up with repeated incidents of misbehaviour and temporary bans come first. Some forum members are in favour of the zero tolerance banning approach and it has its benefits but it leads to what you are suggesting, which is that people can't be certain if they will just have their account switched off and it can become personal that way. The infraction system is there so that it gives people a chance to change their ways and if someone gets banned, there's a record of the incidents for why they were banned so someone else can check it.
Fair enough and have I mentioned how handsome you look today.
Hey Marvin, where do you keep the reasons why someone was banned, just curious.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic