Apple shouldn't pay dishonest media for good reviews.
Let the quality of her products and sales data speak for her.
Well that is what Apple has done and I agree that should suffice. However, when the average Joe believes whatever his favorite TV station or newspaper tells him and those media outlets are being paid to lie, distort and twist, Apple needs to do something more IMHO.
It is ironic that, in this day and age, of all the companies that Samsung has copied, Google has probably been hit the hardest.
I mean, they took Google's "Don't be Evil" motto, modified it slightly, then re-released it:
[SIZE=20px]"Be Evil"[/SIZE]
It should be noted that Google's motto is telling others not to be evil. They could have said "We Aren't Evil. Honest!" or "Evil? Us?! Hey, look, free web apps!"
It should be noted that Google's motto is telling others not to be evil. They could have said "We Aren't Evil. Honest!" or "Evil? Us?! Hey, look, free web apps!"
Pure DED, with a little more tin foil hat than usual. Entertaining read.
"14 month old bug" was fixed by Google 16 months ago... As stated in the article, with the release of Android 4.2- which leaves the majority of Android users unsusceptible to it, much less affected by it.
DED complains that Apple gets unfair bad press and quotes like "It's as bad as you could imagine, that's all I can say"
But the very same source he links to is a complete slam on Android for a bug they fixed 14 months ago with similar sensationalist quotes such as:
~~"This vulnerability is kind of a huge deal," Tod Beardsley, a researcher for Metasploit maintainer Rapid7, wrote in a recent blog post.
The two articles are basically carbon copies- one slamming Apple for a bug they fixed (in iOS at least, Mac users are still exposed- which DED failed to note), and one slamming Android for a bug they fixed 14 months ago and doesn't affect users past Jellybean.
In both Apples and Googles (and what the hell, Microsoft's) cases, bugs are a reality and both companies strive to fix them. The only critique I'd have is on Apple's part for posting the fix to iOS while the vulnerability is still there in OSx. It is great that they rushed it out, but they either need to rush it out to both, or rush it out to iOS without describing it. With all the media attention any bug fix posted gets, Apple may have exposed MacBook users to increased risk. Now that all the malicious peeps are scouring the interwebs to learn the exploit, anyone using a MacBook on a public network is saying 'here I am' until Apple fixes it (hopefully already, or at least this coming week).
I noted DED used several Google references alongside mentions of Samsung astro-turfing and paid blogging efforts, I suppose hoping to conflate the two in readers minds. To the credit of AI readers it looks like no one fell for it.
Having said that if DED's theory is correct then with no evidence that Google pays for favorable coverage either I'd imagine it's only a matter of time before the media turns on them too. In fact IMO there's a lot more negative commentary on both Google and Apple than there was even 5 years ago. Microsoft is pretty much the invisible man now, relatively speaking, a testimony to how little influence is attributed to them nowadays.
I noted DED used several Google references alongside mentions of Samsung astro-turfing and paid blogging efforts, I suppose hoping to conflate the two in readers minds. To the credit of AI readers it looks like no one fell for it.
Having said that if DED's theory is correct then with no evidence that Google pays for favorable coverage either I'd imagine it's only a matter of time before the media turns on them too. In fact IMO there's a lot more negative commentary on both Google and Apple than there was even 5 years ago. Microsoft is pretty much the invisible man now, relatively speaking, a testimony to how little influence is attributed to them nowadays.
Google hasn't needed to do what Scamsung has done because Scamsung is their main Android distribution channel and they do it for them. If Scamsung drop Android then perhaps we might see a change but who knows, perhaps Google folks are all nice honest folks.
The vast legions of average consumers do not read tech blogs or financial news. They only have the trends they see in public. If someone is wealthy, famous or fashionable, chances are good they own an iPhone and they tend to flaunt it.
Most consumers aspire to be like the fashionable celebrities, hence, they desire an iPhone too. If they can afford one they will get it, otherwise they settle for something else.
The social elite prefer iPhone. Only tech geeks who like to root, modify, or skin their phones are actual Android *lovers*. The rest of Android users are simply settling for something less than what they truly desire.
Samsung attempting to persuade the tech market is a waste of time and money, one, because it is a tiny market segment and two, because those knowledgeable tech users are usually steadfast in their conviction to one platform or the other.
Consumers are a much larger market segment and are more impressionable to stylish TV ads such as Apple's rather than the crude ads that Samsung releases.
Where have they once stated that iOS is more secure. Note that pointing out Android's Google Play store having more crapware and its lack of moderation allows for nefarious apps to be installed is not stating that iOS is a more secure OS than Android.
It's on version 7.0.6, as noted in the article.
Why should it take a year for an OS to be updated? You really don't understand how SW works, do you? If you think that not ever updating an OS, like most OEM versions of Android means that Android is perfectly safe then you don't understand why those devices aren't being updated.
Not even close.
It's not that it should take a year to be updated. It's 6 versions in under a year to address security flaws. That would imply there a large number of issues. So you can draw a couple of conclusions - previous versions had less security flaws, previous versions had the same number of security flaws but just weren't being patched, or the new version has more holes.
I noted DED used several Google references alongside mentions of Samsung astro-turfing and paid blogging efforts, I suppose hoping to conflate the two in readers minds. To the credit of AI readers it looks like no one fell for it....the usual rubbish
Another stellar post from you that I enjoyed about as much a T-Rex enjoys push-ups.
At least they update their OS more than once a year... and make it available on more than just their flagship phones on specific carriers. Heck, Apple even updated iOS 6.1. How many infected and broken Android OS versions are out there that will never be upgraded and were never supported after the time they were bought?
Of course, Android is the most secure. You don't have to worry about the security of the device if they are turned off in a drawer collecting dust.
There is another reason why news media favors Samsung. The US does not want South Korea to look bad. I think all US media clearly understand this important principle.
It's not that it should take a year to be updated. It's 6 versions in under a year to address security flaws. That would imply there a large number of issues. So you can draw a couple of conclusions - previous versions had less security flaws, previous versions had the same number of security flaws but just weren't being patched, or the new version has more holes.
So not issuing updates is therefore an indicator of not having security flaws, and if Apple release a single point update to address security issues once a year — regardless of when security issues arise — it means that there OS is more secure. Fucking brilliant¡
It's not that it should take a year to be updated. It's 6 versions in under a year to address security flaws. That would imply there a large number of issues. So you can draw a couple of conclusions - previous versions had less security flaws, previous versions had the same number of security flaws but just weren't being patched, or the new version has more holes.
basically I think you are saying, it's inconclusive what the relationship is with flaw vs updates. I agree. However, I think its better to get updates then none at all, regardless of if they are bug fix or non bug fixes? Do you agree?
Based on iOS updates vs Android updates, what can we conclude then?
It's not that it should take a year to be updated. It's 6 versions in under a year to address security flaws. That would imply there a large number of issues. So you can draw a couple of conclusions - previous versions had less security flaws, previous versions had the same number of security flaws but just weren't being patched, or the new version has more holes.
So not issuing updates is therefore an indicator of not having security flaws, and if Apple release a single point update to address security issues once a year — regardless of when security issues arise — it means that there OS is more secure. Fucking brilliant¡
I don't think that is what mistercow said. I read their logic and it basically means there is no conclusive relationship. Not sure, why they did not simply say it that way. If there was another point to be made, it didn't come over clearly.
btw, mistercow might want to review the version history a bit better before claiming that the past 6 updates were are security flaw related.
That they both issue a lot of updates and fixes, and on a regular basis? Sadly many Android licensees don't take advantage of the Google offered updates and that is unfortunate. I don't blame Google for taking things into their own hands and handling many of the fixes and improvements now via Google Play Services as EricTheHalfBee mentioned in an earlier post.
Comments
It is ironic that, in this day and age, of all the companies that Samsung has copied, Google has probably been hit the hardest.
I mean, they took Google's "Don't be Evil" motto, modified it slightly, then re-released it:
"Be Evil"
Well that is what Apple has done and I agree that should suffice. However, when the average Joe believes whatever his favorite TV station or newspaper tells him and those media outlets are being paid to lie, distort and twist, Apple needs to do something more IMHO.
nah... it wasn't full of links to biased reports.
It should be noted that Google's motto is telling others not to be evil. They could have said "We Aren't Evil. Honest!" or "Evil? Us?! Hey, look, free web apps!"
An IQ of 100 is the exact middle of the distribution curve, a scary thought when you really think about that.
The sub text is 'Leave that to us ..."
Pure DED, with a little more tin foil hat than usual. Entertaining read.
"14 month old bug" was fixed by Google 16 months ago... As stated in the article, with the release of Android 4.2- which leaves the majority of Android users unsusceptible to it, much less affected by it.
DED complains that Apple gets unfair bad press and quotes like "It's as bad as you could imagine, that's all I can say"
But the very same source he links to is a complete slam on Android for a bug they fixed 14 months ago with similar sensationalist quotes such as:
~~"This vulnerability is kind of a huge deal," Tod Beardsley, a researcher for Metasploit maintainer Rapid7, wrote in a recent blog post.
The two articles are basically carbon copies- one slamming Apple for a bug they fixed (in iOS at least, Mac users are still exposed- which DED failed to note), and one slamming Android for a bug they fixed 14 months ago and doesn't affect users past Jellybean.
In both Apples and Googles (and what the hell, Microsoft's) cases, bugs are a reality and both companies strive to fix them. The only critique I'd have is on Apple's part for posting the fix to iOS while the vulnerability is still there in OSx. It is great that they rushed it out, but they either need to rush it out to both, or rush it out to iOS without describing it. With all the media attention any bug fix posted gets, Apple may have exposed MacBook users to increased risk. Now that all the malicious peeps are scouring the interwebs to learn the exploit, anyone using a MacBook on a public network is saying 'here I am' until Apple fixes it (hopefully already, or at least this coming week).
If that's all you got, you don't have much.
Having said that if DED's theory is correct then with no evidence that Google pays for favorable coverage either I'd imagine it's only a matter of time before the media turns on them too. In fact IMO there's a lot more negative commentary on both Google and Apple than there was even 5 years ago. Microsoft is pretty much the invisible man now, relatively speaking, a testimony to how little influence is attributed to them nowadays.
Google hasn't needed to do what Scamsung has done because Scamsung is their main Android distribution channel and they do it for them. If Scamsung drop Android then perhaps we might see a change but who knows, perhaps Google folks are all nice honest folks.
Microsoft? What that?
The vast legions of average consumers do not read tech blogs or financial news. They only have the trends they see in public. If someone is wealthy, famous or fashionable, chances are good they own an iPhone and they tend to flaunt it.
Most consumers aspire to be like the fashionable celebrities, hence, they desire an iPhone too. If they can afford one they will get it, otherwise they settle for something else.
The social elite prefer iPhone. Only tech geeks who like to root, modify, or skin their phones are actual Android *lovers*. The rest of Android users are simply settling for something less than what they truly desire.
Samsung attempting to persuade the tech market is a waste of time and money, one, because it is a tiny market segment and two, because those knowledgeable tech users are usually steadfast in their conviction to one platform or the other.
Consumers are a much larger market segment and are more impressionable to stylish TV ads such as Apple's rather than the crude ads that Samsung releases.
There is, as detailed in the article.
Where have they once stated that iOS is more secure. Note that pointing out Android's Google Play store having more crapware and its lack of moderation allows for nefarious apps to be installed is not stating that iOS is a more secure OS than Android.
It's on version 7.0.6, as noted in the article.
Why should it take a year for an OS to be updated? You really don't understand how SW works, do you? If you think that not ever updating an OS, like most OEM versions of Android means that Android is perfectly safe then you don't understand why those devices aren't being updated.
Not even close.
It's not that it should take a year to be updated. It's 6 versions in under a year to address security flaws. That would imply there a large number of issues. So you can draw a couple of conclusions - previous versions had less security flaws, previous versions had the same number of security flaws but just weren't being patched, or the new version has more holes.
I noted DED used several Google references alongside mentions of Samsung astro-turfing and paid blogging efforts, I suppose hoping to conflate the two in readers minds. To the credit of AI readers it looks like no one fell for it....the usual rubbish
Another stellar post from you that I enjoyed about as much a T-Rex enjoys push-ups.
At least they update their OS more than once a year... and make it available on more than just their flagship phones on specific carriers. Heck, Apple even updated iOS 6.1. How many infected and broken Android OS versions are out there that will never be upgraded and were never supported after the time they were bought?
Of course, Android is the most secure. You don't have to worry about the security of the device if they are turned off in a drawer collecting dust.
So not issuing updates is therefore an indicator of not having security flaws, and if Apple release a single point update to address security issues once a year — regardless of when security issues arise — it means that there OS is more secure. Fucking brilliant¡
It's not that it should take a year to be updated. It's 6 versions in under a year to address security flaws. That would imply there a large number of issues. So you can draw a couple of conclusions - previous versions had less security flaws, previous versions had the same number of security flaws but just weren't being patched, or the new version has more holes.
It's not that it should take a year to be updated. It's 6 versions in under a year to address security flaws. That would imply there a large number of issues. So you can draw a couple of conclusions - previous versions had less security flaws, previous versions had the same number of security flaws but just weren't being patched, or the new version has more holes.
So not issuing updates is therefore an indicator of not having security flaws, and if Apple release a single point update to address security issues once a year — regardless of when security issues arise — it means that there OS is more secure. Fucking brilliant¡
I don't think that is what mistercow said. I read their logic and it basically means there is no conclusive relationship. Not sure, why they did not simply say it that way. If there was another point to be made, it didn't come over clearly.
btw, mistercow might want to review the version history a bit better before claiming that the past 6 updates were are security flaw related.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IOS_version_history#iOS_7.x_3
That they both issue a lot of updates and fixes, and on a regular basis? Sadly many Android licensees don't take advantage of the Google offered updates and that is unfortunate. I don't blame Google for taking things into their own hands and handling many of the fixes and improvements now via Google Play Services as EricTheHalfBee mentioned in an earlier post.