I only send this to you as you are the AI resident Google representative.
As recent spate of very public lists like this seem to be more marketing attacks by negativity given the way the tech blogs pick them up, perhaps MS & Apple should set up a team to do detailed reporting of all Google's software issues and report them very publicly too. After all Google could send them to MS & Apple but keep them private but don't.
It's a love-hate. They do great and important work, but they are also very willing to skirt the edge of ethical public disclosure for what they see is the greater good (forcing developers to patch their code).
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagMan1979
That's yet another extremely arrogant, and short-sighted comment...
Are you one of the developers on the Windows or OS X teams? Do you know how complex it must be to patch a piece of software that is comprised of MILLIONS of lines of code? Do you know how much testing must be done to ensure it doesn't break a product used by MILLIONS of business and consumers around the entire planet? I highly doubt it, so what makes you think you (or even anyone here, including myself for that matter) can make such pretentious and assuming comments without ZERO foundational knowledge?
Go explain this to the NSA and botnets and whoever took over Sony Pictures. "Hey, don't hack our systems, steal credit card data and wipe our computers, please. We need to make sure we don't break anything else before we fix it."
Different world. Different practices. This isn't the year 2000 anymore.
As someone who codes business intranet web apps for desktop and mobile that make extensive use of Google APIs / toolkits (OAuth, Drive, Calendar, gmail), I beg to differ.
I don't like the way Google users are their product, Google clients are the advertisers and not the other way around. I feel very uneasy to ties our business ressources to Google ecosystem of perpetual beta solutions without any liability regarding users and monetizing users usage information with advertiser.
I understand that the issues that were exposed by Project Zero relate to security. However one of the issues centers around memory corruption. Could 10.10.2, in addition to plugging security holes, make the OS run faster and more smoothly as well? In recent years, OS X has become super-bloated, with Apple spending more time adding features than spending time streamlining the system. I hope this can be remedied soon because OS X's reputation will start to be hurt if nothing is done about it.
Go explain this to the NSA and botnets and whoever took over Sony Pictures. "Hey, don't hack our systems, steal credit card data and wipe our computers, please. We need to make sure we don't break anything else before we fix it."
Different world. Different practices. This isn't the year 2000 anymore.
Jesus, what's with all the ignorant comments here today?
We don't know what fully happened with the Sony hack... We know they used social phishing with employees to gain entry, and that they did exploit some vulnerabilities, perhaps a zero-day flaw, to gain access to Sony's infrastructure, but nothing specific.
Also, corporations are FAMOUS for NOT installing patches the moment Microsoft releases them for fear of breaking in-house developed software, or their Intranet web apps. And vulnerabilities in a corporation can extend much further beyond the desktop OS in active deployment; firewall appliances, network switches, network backbones can all play a factor into a hack of this scale, and we've seen time and time again corporations usually give IT and security the priority level along the same lines of "where will I take a dump this afternoon after lunch?".
Using a corporation as an example is a very poor example.
As someone who codes business intranet web apps for desktop and mobile that make extensive use of Google APIs / toolkits (OAuth, Drive, Calendar, gmail), I beg to differ.
A year ago Google's tech support and corporate customer sales staff were a joke. Today I can only sing their praises. Responsive, professional, effective, inexpensive.
Compared to Apple, Microsoft, Oracle or any of the others - no comparison. Not even close.
Google interoperates with multiple environments and platforms. Apple works with... Apple.
The things our company does with Google services could never be done with iCloud.
The things Google Services do with your data would never be done by Apple. Remember, Google HandOff is "we get a copy, you get a copy".
No, I compared Google's corporate support with Apple's corporate support, at this point in time.
I've had vast experience with both. You, on the other hand, apparently read some blogs or something.
"Don't criticize what you don't understand " bob dylan
Funny, I was going to use the same quote directed at your ignorant comments. I can get a level 3 Apple engineer (not support rep) on the phone within 10 minutes if I'm having issues with one of my Apple products, and almost always gets resolved to everyones' satisfaction. Google has NEVER resolved ANYTHING to anyone's satisfaction, not even close. This goes for the monkey's Microsoft has working for them as well.
I wonder how many zero-day exploits they'd find in Android. Maybe they should turn their attention to that.
And how many exploits will never be fixed because the device owners can't get the fixes for one reason or another (the OEM won't supply the update and/or Google stopped supporting their version of Android).
Quote:
That said, Apple should have fixed these by now if they really were properly notified 90 days ago.
Sometimes it can take a while to make the right fix -- you need to pinpoint where it needs to be made (possibly multiple locations to cover all cases) and then regression test everything to make sure it doesn't break compatibility with everything that's using that part of the code.
In some cases it could be comparable to a structural repair made to a skyscraper or a bridge: you need to do the proper analysis to be sure the fix isn't going to cause other problems.
I don't like the way Google users are their product, Google clients are the advertisers and not the other way around. I feel very uneasy to ties our business ressources to Google ecosystem of perpetual beta solutions without any liability regarding users and monetizing users usage information with advertiser.
Valid points. When you pay for google services, you don't see ads.
I'm gonna go out on a limb and speculate that the EULA for iCloud has the same liability restrictions as Google Drive.
$5 / month per user is cheap for the business service & support you receive.
I'd recommend web based Google docs over web based Pages / Numbers.
Keynote is better than PowerPoint on the desktop. I've not tried the web version.
If you email business data, you are more exposed than if you utilize Google Drive.
To address an earlier response, I'm pretty sure everyone I've spoken to @ Google Tech support is an engineer.
Go explain this to the NSA and botnets and whoever took over Sony Pictures. "Hey, don't hack our systems, steal credit card data and wipe our computers, please. We need to make sure we don't break anything else before we fix it."
Different world. Different practices. This isn't the year 2000 anymore.
Maybe you should reread my post, which gives them praise for their work, but not their practices:
Quote:
Unfortunately, though, these things aren't often black and white and I'm sure many scenarios that pass the 90 day "limit" are in that grey zone.
"Hey, why don't we go to Google Project Zero and read the vulnerabilities that are not patched yet, because of their complexity in function."
To address an earlier response, I'm pretty sure everyone I've spoken to @ Google Tech support is an engineer.
Now you're too afraid to even direct quote me with your responses that you edit previous comments and lump your response in there?
Damn, we have a winner here folks. EVERY tech company, Google included, does NOT place engineers on the help desk, or even level 2 support lines. Learn what an engineer actually means next time.
Now you're too afraid to even direct quote me with your responses that you edit previous comments and lump your response in there?
Damn, we have a winner here folks. EVERY tech company, Google included, does NOT place engineers on the help desk, or even level 2 support lines. Learn what an engineer actually means next time.
Funny, I was going to use the same quote directed at your ignorant comments. I can get a level 3 Apple engineer (not support rep) on the phone within 10 minutes if I'm having issues with one of my Apple products, and almost always gets resolved to everyones' satisfaction. Google has NEVER resolved ANYTHING to anyone's satisfaction, not even close. This goes for the monkey's Microsoft has working for them as well. Apparently I work for a living, you just run your mouth spewing pro-Google propaganda.
You're correct, I confused you for someone that wasn't a straight-up Google troll.
Did you just compare consumer support to corporate/partner support? I hope you don't think they are similar.
Google's end consumer support is a black hole. Their partner support is quite good based on the experiences the dev teams at my company have had.
Which partner services have you had negative experience with?
Valid points. When you pay for google services, you don't see ads.
I'm gonna go out on a limb and speculate that the EULA for iCloud has the same liability restrictions as Google Drive.
$5 / month per user is cheap for the business service & support you receive.
I'd recommend web based Google docs over web based Pages / Numbers.
Keynote is better than PowerPoint on the desktop. I've not tried the web version.
If you email business data, you are more exposed than if you utilize Google Drive.
To address an earlier response, I'm pretty sure everyone I've spoken to @ Google Tech support is an engineer.
I mostly agree with your analyse. Don't get me wrong, I don't consider iCould or any Apple service offering nor any "free" cloud solution a business level solution. I found hard to see those iCloud Drive-Skydive-onedrive-Google Drive-DropBox as a good replacement for a real enterprise level files server like a MacMini with MacOS X server which offert endless capacity and deployment flexibility.
I believe their job is to investigate issues in software the Google engineering group encounters when interacting with otherproducts while issues within Android are handled directly by that dept, but I could be wrong as I haven't done much digging into them.
It's a love-hate. They do great and important work, but they are also very willing to skirt the edge of ethical public disclosure for what they see is the greater good (forcing developers to patch their code). Unfortunately, though, these things aren't often black and white and I'm sure many scenarios that pass the 90 day "limit" are in that grey zone.
I mostly agree with you analyse. Don't get my wrong, I don't consider iCould or any Apple service offering nor any "free" cloud solution a business level solution. I found hard to see those iCloud Drive-Skydive-onedrive-Google Drive-DropBox as a good replacement for a real enterprise level files server like a MacMini with MacOS X server which offert endless capacity and deployment flexibility.
While a local Mac Mini setup would certainly put you in more direct control, you'd have to work pretty hard to achieve the level of redundancy that you would get with a cloud solution.
Comments
I only send this to you as you are the AI resident Google representative.
As recent spate of very public lists like this seem to be more marketing attacks by negativity given the way the tech blogs pick them up, perhaps MS & Apple should set up a team to do detailed reporting of all Google's software issues and report them very publicly too. After all Google could send them to MS & Apple but keep them private but don't.
It's a love-hate. They do great and important work, but they are also very willing to skirt the edge of ethical public disclosure for what they see is the greater good (forcing developers to patch their code).
That's yet another extremely arrogant, and short-sighted comment...
Are you one of the developers on the Windows or OS X teams? Do you know how complex it must be to patch a piece of software that is comprised of MILLIONS of lines of code? Do you know how much testing must be done to ensure it doesn't break a product used by MILLIONS of business and consumers around the entire planet? I highly doubt it, so what makes you think you (or even anyone here, including myself for that matter) can make such pretentious and assuming comments without ZERO foundational knowledge?
Go explain this to the NSA and botnets and whoever took over Sony Pictures. "Hey, don't hack our systems, steal credit card data and wipe our computers, please. We need to make sure we don't break anything else before we fix it."
Different world. Different practices. This isn't the year 2000 anymore.
As someone who codes business intranet web apps for desktop and mobile that make extensive use of Google APIs / toolkits (OAuth, Drive, Calendar, gmail), I beg to differ.
I don't like the way Google users are their product, Google clients are the advertisers and not the other way around. I feel very uneasy to ties our business ressources to Google ecosystem of perpetual beta solutions without any liability regarding users and monetizing users usage information with advertiser.
Jeopardy of today ...
Answer: Bunch of useless no-talent idiots who have been forced to do something / anything ... else no $paycheque$ from google's Ads business!
Question: What is Google Project Zero?
We don't know what fully happened with the Sony hack... We know they used social phishing with employees to gain entry, and that they did exploit some vulnerabilities, perhaps a zero-day flaw, to gain access to Sony's infrastructure, but nothing specific.
Also, corporations are FAMOUS for NOT installing patches the moment Microsoft releases them for fear of breaking in-house developed software, or their Intranet web apps. And vulnerabilities in a corporation can extend much further beyond the desktop OS in active deployment; firewall appliances, network switches, network backbones can all play a factor into a hack of this scale, and we've seen time and time again corporations usually give IT and security the priority level along the same lines of "where will I take a dump this afternoon after lunch?".
Using a corporation as an example is a very poor example.
As someone who codes business intranet web apps for desktop and mobile that make extensive use of Google APIs / toolkits (OAuth, Drive, Calendar, gmail), I beg to differ.
A year ago Google's tech support and corporate customer sales staff were a joke. Today I can only sing their praises. Responsive, professional, effective, inexpensive.
Compared to Apple, Microsoft, Oracle or any of the others - no comparison. Not even close.
Google interoperates with multiple environments and platforms. Apple works with... Apple.
The things our company does with Google services could never be done with iCloud.
The things Google Services do with your data would never be done by Apple. Remember, Google HandOff is "we get a copy, you get a copy".
No, I compared Google's corporate support with Apple's corporate support, at this point in time.
I've had vast experience with both. You, on the other hand, apparently read some blogs or something.
"Don't criticize what you don't understand " bob dylan
You've obviously confused me with someone who gives a damn.
Naivety, like ignorance, is bliss.
Funny, I was going to use the same quote directed at your ignorant comments. I can get a level 3 Apple engineer (not support rep) on the phone within 10 minutes if I'm having issues with one of my Apple products, and almost always gets resolved to everyones' satisfaction. Google has NEVER resolved ANYTHING to anyone's satisfaction, not even close. This goes for the monkey's Microsoft has working for them as well.
I wonder how many zero-day exploits they'd find in Android. Maybe they should turn their attention to that.
And how many exploits will never be fixed because the device owners can't get the fixes for one reason or another (the OEM won't supply the update and/or Google stopped supporting their version of Android).
Sometimes it can take a while to make the right fix -- you need to pinpoint where it needs to be made (possibly multiple locations to cover all cases) and then regression test everything to make sure it doesn't break compatibility with everything that's using that part of the code.
In some cases it could be comparable to a structural repair made to a skyscraper or a bridge: you need to do the proper analysis to be sure the fix isn't going to cause other problems.
Valid points. When you pay for google services, you don't see ads.
I'm gonna go out on a limb and speculate that the EULA for iCloud has the same liability restrictions as Google Drive.
$5 / month per user is cheap for the business service & support you receive.
I'd recommend web based Google docs over web based Pages / Numbers.
Keynote is better than PowerPoint on the desktop. I've not tried the web version.
If you email business data, you are more exposed than if you utilize Google Drive.
To address an earlier response, I'm pretty sure everyone I've spoken to @ Google Tech support is an engineer.
Go explain this to the NSA and botnets and whoever took over Sony Pictures. "Hey, don't hack our systems, steal credit card data and wipe our computers, please. We need to make sure we don't break anything else before we fix it."
Different world. Different practices. This isn't the year 2000 anymore.
Maybe you should reread my post, which gives them praise for their work, but not their practices:
"Hey, why don't we go to Google Project Zero and read the vulnerabilities that are not patched yet, because of their complexity in function."
Damn, we have a winner here folks. EVERY tech company, Google included, does NOT place engineers on the help desk, or even level 2 support lines. Learn what an engineer actually means next time.
You win.
Did you just compare consumer support to corporate/partner support? I hope you don't think they are similar.
Google's end consumer support is a black hole. Their partner support is quite good based on the experiences the dev teams at my company have had.
Which partner services have you had negative experience with?
Valid points. When you pay for google services, you don't see ads.
I'm gonna go out on a limb and speculate that the EULA for iCloud has the same liability restrictions as Google Drive.
$5 / month per user is cheap for the business service & support you receive.
I'd recommend web based Google docs over web based Pages / Numbers.
Keynote is better than PowerPoint on the desktop. I've not tried the web version.
If you email business data, you are more exposed than if you utilize Google Drive.
To address an earlier response, I'm pretty sure everyone I've spoken to @ Google Tech support is an engineer.
I mostly agree with your analyse. Don't get me wrong, I don't consider iCould or any Apple service offering nor any "free" cloud solution a business level solution. I found hard to see those iCloud Drive-Skydive-onedrive-Google Drive-DropBox as a good replacement for a real enterprise level files server like a MacMini with MacOS X server which offert endless capacity and deployment flexibility.
I believe their job is to investigate issues in software the Google engineering group encounters when interacting with other products while issues within Android are handled directly by that dept, but I could be wrong as I haven't done much digging into them.
It's a love-hate. They do great and important work, but they are also very willing to skirt the edge of ethical public disclosure for what they see is the greater good (forcing developers to patch their code). Unfortunately, though, these things aren't often black and white and I'm sure many scenarios that pass the 90 day "limit" are in that grey zone.
90 days is twice as long as the industry standard. CERT discloses after 45 days (https://www.cert.org/vulnerability-analysis/vul-disclosure.cfm). The IETF recommends 30 days (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-christey-wysopal-vuln-disclosure-00).
I mostly agree with you analyse. Don't get my wrong, I don't consider iCould or any Apple service offering nor any "free" cloud solution a business level solution. I found hard to see those iCloud Drive-Skydive-onedrive-Google Drive-DropBox as a good replacement for a real enterprise level files server like a MacMini with MacOS X server which offert endless capacity and deployment flexibility.
While a local Mac Mini setup would certainly put you in more direct control, you'd have to work pretty hard to achieve the level of redundancy that you would get with a cloud solution.