Google's Schmidt says Android more secure than the iPhone

in General Discussion edited January 2014
Google chair Eric Schmidt raised eyebrows and got a few unintentional laughs on Monday when he said that Google's Android platform is more secure than Apple's iPhone.

Schmidt's remarks came in the course of a question-and-answer session at the Gartner Symposium/ITxpo, according to ZDNet. A Gartner analyst said to Schmidt that most people in the audience would not name Android as their primary platform and went on to note the operating system's notorious security problems.

"Not secure?" Schmidt countered. "It's more secure than the iPhone."

According to reports, Schmidt did not elaborate on those remarks, instead going on to cite Android's billion-strong activation numbers. That figure, he claimed, led to considerable real-world security testing. When the Gartner analyst again raised the issue toward the end of the session, Schmidt remained firm.

"Android is very secure," Schmidt said to some chuckling from both the audience and the analyst.

Google has over the years built new security features into its mobile platform, but the number of malware attacks on Google's operating system continues to grow. Comparatively, Apple's iOS platform accounts for a small percentage of attacks, due in part to Apple's strict control over the apps that are published in its App Store.

The enterprise segment in particular has noted that security gap, and Apple continues to grow in that sector, despite Android's overall market share lead in mobile. The addition of Touch ID ? the biometric scanner built into the iPhone 5s ? is seen by some as a means of expanding Apple's security lead.


  • Reply 1 of 213
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,423member
    Hope he has a small foot or a really good dentist.
  • Reply 2 of 213
    akqiesakqies Posts: 768member
    The problem with such statements is that even though it's not true in any real sense the lack of clarification — much like Android activations — means that he doesn't have to back it up, and even if he did he could cite something that would support his flawed perspective thus allowing him to make the statement without legal penalty.
  • Reply 3 of 213
    Sigh. You know...Schmidt says a lot of things.
  • Reply 4 of 213
    rob53rob53 Posts: 3,010member
    What's he been drinking and smoking? The only android configuration approved for government use contains software not written by google. It just shows how unaware this guy is.
  • Reply 5 of 213
    muldermulder Posts: 10member
    Bam! Straight from the horses mouth.
    He said it, so it must be true!
  • Reply 6 of 213
    jexusjexus Posts: 373member

    NOT even close.

    I love FOSS as much as a similar enthusiast but in this case, no just no Google.

  • Reply 7 of 213
    My Nexus is very secure never had problem with it. I'm sure too that iPhone is very secure as well.
  • Reply 8 of 213
    akqiesakqies Posts: 768member
    stylorouge wrote: »
    My Nexus is very secure never had problem with it. I'm sure too that iPhone is very secure as well.

    You've never had a problem with it so it means it's secure? You need to rethink your logic.
  • Reply 9 of 213
    He must have swallowed a Galaxy 2 which cut off his air long enough for BRAIN DAMAGE!!!!
  • Reply 10 of 213
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,921member
    Creepy Eric does it again! Hey weren't we all suppose to have Google TV by now?!
  • Reply 11 of 213
    Let's be frank here...

    I completely understand someone standing by their own product, it's just natural. To do otherwise would be like admitting your own children are not the greatest.

    But, like everything, there are sometimes where you just roll with the punch without trying too hard to block it, unless you want to be seen as completely alienated from reality.

    When you do things this way, forcing a point of view at complete odds with what is factual, you just expose your (and your product's) mediocrity!

    Before some fandroid retaliates, I must say I gave it a fair chance, I myself have an iPhone 4S (bought it at launch I'm still waiting for it to fail me in the slightest) but my wife won a Galaxy S4 in a raffle. Android s*cks the big one. For a oversized and battery hungry device, it performs like a half baked netbook, it is slow and ugly in everything it does, not to mention the care I'm forced to take in security because my wife really doesn't get internet security (she opens every spam she gets in her mail, and while she could do it in my mac, iPad or iPhone without a problem, I had to explain that she just could not do the same me her phone, quite similarly to her Windows netbook!).

    So, dear Mr. Schmidt, get a hold of yourself, you are embarrassing even the most die hard fandroid!
  • Reply 12 of 213
    akqies wrote: »
    You've never had a problem with it so it means it's secure? You need to rethink your logic.
    I actually had more problems with my iPhone than android. Maybe I'm lucky.
  • Reply 13 of 213
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 9,233member

    What kind of drugs do they take over @Google? Must be some really good shit.


    Many major brand mobile apps not secure on Android, says study


    Corporate Android Apps Not All Secure


    Millions of Android users vulnerable to security threats, say feds


    Android OS Is Least Secure Platform for Aircraft Electronic Flight Bags



    Android Security Vulnerability



    etc., etc.,etc.,etc.,etc.,etc.,etc.,etc.,etc.,etc.,etc.,etc.,etc.,etc.,etc.,

  • Reply 14 of 213
    asciiascii Posts: 5,936member

    If sheer number of activations means more secure then Windows must be the most secure desktop OS.

  • Reply 15 of 213

    *cough* iFruit malware on Google Play Store *cough*

  • Reply 16 of 213
    This is Eric's attempt at a Reality Distortion Field.
  • Reply 17 of 213
    akqiesakqies Posts: 768member
    stylorouge wrote: »
    I actually had more problems with my iPhone than android. Maybe I'm lucky.

    You had problems with malware and/or your iPhone being hacked? You think this is lucky?
  • Reply 18 of 213
    jexusjexus Posts: 373member

    Originally Posted by NotTylerDurden View Post

    This is Eric's attempt at a Reality Distortion Field.

    If it is, it's by far one of the worst attempts(if you could even call it that) I've ever seen.

    This doesn't even deserve and E for effort.

  • Reply 19 of 213
    I don't this this word "secure", means what you think it means smitty!
  • Reply 20 of 213
    andysolandysol Posts: 2,506member
    That guy is full of Schmidt
Sign In or Register to comment.