That's not the point. The point I was making is that Daniel likes to cherry-pick which news stories he reports on to further his anti-Android agenda. He constantly reports on stories which portray Apple in the most positive light and conveniently glosses over, forgets or outright ignores those that don't.
The post I made is just another example of this. Daniel likes to rail against any and all Android security flaws but when Apple has security flaws of their own suddenly Daniel goes silent.
You do realize editorials cite articles that back up the thesis. Hell, high school term papers do the same thing.
You do realize editorials cite articles that back up the thesis. Hell, high school term papers do the same thing.
Yes but most editorials & high school term papers don't cite the same person making said editorials and they certainly don't do so via sockpuppet aliases, something Daniel has little trouble in doing.
The lead sentence from that article starts "Apple on Monday pushed out an update addressing a "critical security issue" for OS X..." iOS may have issues but Apple does address them and get them out to EVERYONE in a timely manner. When will Android users get their updates???
That's not the point. The point I was making is that Daniel likes to cherry-pick which news stories he reports on to further his anti-Android agenda. He constantly reports on stories which portray Apple in the most positive light and conveniently glosses over, forgets or outright ignores those that don't.
The post I made is just another example of this. Daniel likes to rail against any and all Android security flaws but when Apple has security flaws of their own suddenly Daniel goes silent.
You couldn't give me a free POS phone installed with Android. It's shocking to me that people still buy anything running on an Android platform. Forget the latest update just the security flaws alone. Even tablets running Android at Best Buy are infected with malware. No thanks.
This is very interesting, I have personally used the latest Lollipop 5.0.2 on a Nexus 5 as well as a OPO, which is my daily driver. I have not experienced any significant problems. There is the random slowdown and some fcs. It's a significant improvement over 4.4. I'm even using the nightly CM12 builds. I cannot say the same about iOS8. On my iPad there are constant issues with the keyboard(stock app) and random wifi issues, apps closing, and awful lag.
The data collection in this article is not consistent, 1 day for ios vs 7 day period for android. Don't believe everything you read.
This is a known security issue with a recent version of Android that requires updating the OS to fix it.
However, OEMs can't/won't push thru the update because:
Being hardware manufacturers they lack the expertise, and/or
Because their margins are so small they have a disincentive to do so as it's more cost-effective for them to force their customers to but new phones rather than keep the current ones secure and up-to-date.
And meanwhile Google can't/won't force the OEMs to put thru the update because, after all, Google didn't compel the OEMs to adopt the platform in the first place.
And is the above supposed to be a selling point? Is this elaborate rationalization supposed to make me want to get a device running Android?
Evidently, the business model for Google--and for Samsung, Motorola, Sony, LG, etc for that matter--is 'there's one born every minute.'
And as for their end users--who should be demanding better--apparently being able to customize their Home page is an adequate trade-off.
This is a known security issue with a recent version of Android that requires updating the OS to fix it.
However, OEMs can't/won't push thru the update because:
Being hardware manufacturers they lack the expertise, and/or
Because their margins are so small they have a disincentive to do so as it's actually more cost-effective for them to force their customers to but new phones rather than keep the current ones secure and up-to-date.
And meanwhile Google can't/won't force the OEMs to put thru the update because, after all, Google didn't compel the OEMs to adopt the platform in the first place.
And is the above supposed to be a selling point? Is this elaborate rationalization supposed to make me want to get a device running Android?
Evidently, the business model for Google--and for Samsung, Motorola, Sony, LG, etc for that matter--is 'there's one born every minute.'
And as for their end users--who by rights should be demanding better--apparently, being able to customize their Home page is an adequate trade-off.
Let me see if I have this right.
<p style="min-height:14px;"> </p>
This is a known security issue with a recent version of Android that requires updating the OS to fix it.
<p style="min-height:14px;"> </p>
However, OEMs can't/won't push thru the update because:
<p style="min-height:14px;"> </p>
Being hardware manufacturers they lack the expertise, and/or
<p style="min-height:14px;"> </p>
Because their margins are so small they have a disincentive to do so as it's more cost-effective for them to force their customers to but new phones rather than keep the current ones secure and up-to-date.
<p style="min-height:14px;"> </p>
And meanwhile Google can't/won't force the OEMs to put thru the update because, after all, Google didn't compel the OEMs to adopt the platform in the first place.
<p style="min-height:14px;"> </p>
And is the above supposed to be a selling point? Is this elaborate rationalization supposed to make me want to get a device running Android?
<p style="min-height:14px;"> </p>
Evidently, the business model for Google--and for Samsung, Motorola, Sony, LG, etc for that matter--is 'there's one born every minute.'
<p style="min-height:14px;"> </p>
And as for their end users--who should be demanding better--apparently being able to customize their Home page is an adequate trade-off.
Where did anyone say it was a selling point? What's the alternative? 6-7 different OSes? Do you believe the market would bear that?
Where did anyone say it was a selling point? What's the alternative? 6-7 different OSes? Do you believe the market would bear that?
I never said anyone said it was a selling point. My asking if it was supposed to be was obviously a rhetorical question. I was pointing out the delicious irony by which in constructing such a laughably convoluted defense of Google's inaction the Fandroids trolling this forum actually ended up making a stronger case for buying an iPhone. It was a subtle point, to be sure, but I'm sorry you missed it.
I don't know what the alternatives are, but if I was an affected user I would consider them. Certainly, the status quo in which the OEM's & Google just shrug the shoulders and tell me, "Sorry, we know your phone is only six months old but you're out of luck and on your on. Sucks to be you" would hardly seem acceptable. I realize many Android users are adverse to Apple and would never get an iPhone. Perhaps they could consider a Windows phone. I've heard good about them, and if Microsoft is vigilante about keeping the OS safe and up to date that may be worth a look. If Google lost enough market share because of this it may force them to do something about it, the same way lose of market share to phablets forced Apple to release bigger phones.
It does seem to me as we move increasingly to an era of NFC-enable devices this kind of thing takes on more importance.
Comments
Again, Google's fault. No excuse not to upgrade the Nexus.
You do realize editorials cite articles that back up the thesis. Hell, high school term papers do the same thing.
You do realize editorials cite articles that back up the thesis. Hell, high school term papers do the same thing.
Yes but most editorials & high school term papers don't cite the same person making said editorials and they certainly don't do so via sockpuppet aliases, something Daniel has little trouble in doing.
You mean a bit like this http://arstechnica.com/security/2015/01/worlds-first-known-bootkit-for-os-x-can-permanently-backdoor-macs/
He is afraid of the truth what he may find out about Apple is not always 100% great and they have flaws like other cellphone makers.
Nothing wrong with being biased towards a given platform, however when Daniel constantly rails against a given platform's insecurities (Android) while conveniently ignoring his favorite platform's own issues (such as this: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/184021/apple-releases-critical-security-update-for-os-x-ntp-services-vulnerability) all while doing so under sockpuppet aliases it smacks of intellectual dishonesty.
At least Apple sends out an update for known issues and doesn't write off 60% of their customers.
The data collection in this article is not consistent, 1 day for ios vs 7 day period for android. Don't believe everything you read.
Let me see if I have this right.
This is a known security issue with a recent version of Android that requires updating the OS to fix it.
However, OEMs can't/won't push thru the update because:
Being hardware manufacturers they lack the expertise, and/or
Because their margins are so small they have a disincentive to do so as it's more cost-effective for them to force their customers to but new phones rather than keep the current ones secure and up-to-date.
And meanwhile Google can't/won't force the OEMs to put thru the update because, after all, Google didn't compel the OEMs to adopt the platform in the first place.
And is the above supposed to be a selling point? Is this elaborate rationalization supposed to make me want to get a device running Android?
Evidently, the business model for Google--and for Samsung, Motorola, Sony, LG, etc for that matter--is 'there's one born every minute.'
And as for their end users--who should be demanding better--apparently being able to customize their Home page is an adequate trade-off.
Let me see if I have this right.
This is a known security issue with a recent version of Android that requires updating the OS to fix it.
However, OEMs can't/won't push thru the update because:
Being hardware manufacturers they lack the expertise, and/or
Because their margins are so small they have a disincentive to do so as it's actually more cost-effective for them to force their customers to but new phones rather than keep the current ones secure and up-to-date.
And meanwhile Google can't/won't force the OEMs to put thru the update because, after all, Google didn't compel the OEMs to adopt the platform in the first place.
And is the above supposed to be a selling point? Is this elaborate rationalization supposed to make me want to get a device running Android?
Evidently, the business model for Google--and for Samsung, Motorola, Sony, LG, etc for that matter--is 'there's one born every minute.'
And as for their end users--who by rights should be demanding better--apparently, being able to customize their Home page is an adequate trade-off.
Where did anyone say it was a selling point? What's the alternative? 6-7 different OSes? Do you believe the market would bear that?
Where did anyone say it was a selling point? What's the alternative? 6-7 different OSes? Do you believe the market would bear that?
I never said anyone said it was a selling point. My asking if it was supposed to be was obviously a rhetorical question. I was pointing out the delicious irony by which in constructing such a laughably convoluted defense of Google's inaction the Fandroids trolling this forum actually ended up making a stronger case for buying an iPhone. It was a subtle point, to be sure, but I'm sorry you missed it.
I don't know what the alternatives are, but if I was an affected user I would consider them. Certainly, the status quo in which the OEM's & Google just shrug the shoulders and tell me, "Sorry, we know your phone is only six months old but you're out of luck and on your on. Sucks to be you" would hardly seem acceptable. I realize many Android users are adverse to Apple and would never get an iPhone. Perhaps they could consider a Windows phone. I've heard good about them, and if Microsoft is vigilante about keeping the OS safe and up to date that may be worth a look. If Google lost enough market share because of this it may force them to do something about it, the same way lose of market share to phablets forced Apple to release bigger phones.
It does seem to me as we move increasingly to an era of NFC-enable devices this kind of thing takes on more importance.