I can see it now - first your show chaos and turmoil, pain and suffering, think medieval images of hell, then pan over to peace and light and joy, etc, think images of Heaven, then pull back to a sign that says Welcome to the Garden, then pull back a little farther and the sign is in the back of an Apple Store, then come down and zoom in as customer is handed their new iPhone and waved on towards the "pearly" gates.
Love it. Dante's Inferno comes to mind for the outside scene and it is out of copyright I assume.
I hope you realize that observation goes both ways, but considering your posting history, I'm afraid you sincerely believe that iOS fanboys are somehow worse, or that there are many more of them.
You can stop being afraid. I don't know any real stats, and I try to base my beliefs on verifiable evidence.
McAfee did note that Apple's Mac platform has faced a threat from a fake anti-virus malware called MacDefender. The firm speculated that such attacks would eventually make their way to the iPhone and iPad, calling it a "case of "when" rather than "if.""
And when that happens McAfee will be trumpeting the security of Android because its malware count only went up 70% while the IOS count went up by an infinite percentage! Though the real number remains at 1 not 100,000 or some other huge number.
[I] think ... Android users are mostly juvenile angry young men with a chip on their shoulder ...
Reality: Most smartphone buyers choose Android.
Put that together with your thought, and ISTM inevitable that you must think that most current smartphone buyers are "juvenile angry young men with a chip on their shoulder".
You may be correct, but I have severe doubts. Got anything other than your thinking process to justify that conclusion?
(2) the best way to protect a computer operating system from stuff you couldn't anticipate (or fix) is by controlling the input methods (data and apps) rather than giving the user free reign to dump anything they find out there onto their computers
Why does Apple choose to forego the best way to protect OSX? They give their customers free reign to dump anything they find out there onto their Macs.
Reality: Most smartphone buyers choose Android. ...
This is not a true statement. It's more of an extrapolation by yourself based on some fairly dodgy reports of channel sales.
In truth I should have said "most Android lovers" or "most Android aficionado's" rather than "most Android users." A lot of folks use Android because that's what's sold to them, not because they choose it per se.
In any case, it was a statement of what I believe, not what I can prove, and was just a (perhaps poorly worded) preamble to my actual point.
Why does Apple choose to forego the best way to protect OSX? They give their customers free reign to dump anything they find out there onto their Macs.
Why?
Well there's a whole legacy thing there. Those worms were let out of the can long ago... long before the internet, in fact, and even longer before concerns of viruses were mainstream. It's difficult to abruptly force your long time users to stop doing things one way completely in favor of another. It's even more difficult to abruptly turn your back on the big software houses that still produce value added capabilities which can only be either side-loaded or downloaded from their sites. (Not that Apple hasn't done it on occasion!) If Apple forced users to only get their software through the Mac App store today, you would create a hole in the capability set of Macs. For the moment, that hole would be too large, and the Mac OS resurgence would falter. You can't pull off a stunt like that without some sort of dominance.
It seems to me that Apple is slowly trying to herd those worms back into the can. With the increased visibility and importance of the Mac App store in Lion, a greater fraction of Mac users will get used to obtaining their software that way. Eventually, if the big third party software houses play along, then Apple will lock Mac OS down too. But it is a long road, and I'm not utterly convinced that all the necessary software developers will play ball. If even one new killer application is created for PC's and/or Macs, but that developer does not want to utilize the Mac App store, then you might see a revolt. That would be one ballsy developer, though, and if the Mac OS share is large enough, it would be a case of cutting off your nose just to spite your face. We shall see.
With a little bit of intelligence on where you source your apps, the kind of apps you install and checking out app permissions, you can easily avoid any trouble.
You forgot the easiest way to avoid trouble ..... just avoid Android, as 100s of millions of us are. Instead of worrying about .... "where you source your apps, the kind of apps you install and checking out app permissions", we just enjoy our Apple devices. Cheers!
Anyway, the study is biased. They should compare Androids with Cydia'd iPhones, which are most of them... and suddenly the picture is different. Or they should compare iPhones with Androids that only run Apps from the official store. Comparing Androids with unofficial stores and iPhones with no Cydia (again... very little subset) is just dishonnest.
Well, that depends on what you are trying to measure.
(1) If you are trying to measure the relative safety of the typical Android purchaser (over ten million per month) including his likely behaviors, versus the safety of the typical iPhone purchaser (a bit less than seven million per month last quarter) including his likely behaviors, then I would say it's appropriate to compare a general Android user (with people grabbing apps from wherever they can find them, at the recommendation of friends, etc) versus a non-jail-broken iPhone user. I would be willing to bet money that iPhones with no Cydia is the vast majority out there. You got Moms, Pops, Teens, Tweens, and Grandparents worldwide getting iPhones at the rate of 20+ million per quarter. I'd bet that 80% of them have never even heard of Cydia let alone jailbroken their phones.
(2) If you are trying to compare the relative safety of the underlying operating systems, as opposed to the walls erected around it, then I agree with your suggestion: compare a general Android phone with a jail-broken iPhone.
Note that the vast majority of consumers are more interested in the answer to number (1). (Edit: that is, if they even bother to ask! But the point of this article is that we are asking the question for them.) At the end of the day, they just want to know, "if I walk out of this store with this device in my hand and just use it however it lets me use it, what is my level of security?" It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that the answer is that iOS will provide more protection. But along with that comes the inflexibility that some people don't like. So they jail break their iPhone and ask the other question. In that case, my hunch is that at the end of the day both OS's are going to have enough vulnerabilities that it really won't make a difference which has more. The bottom line there is whether you are power-user enough to maintain your gear, which is a desirable quality if you jailbreak your iPhone anyway.
Conclusion: if you are a power user that wants to "own" his gear through and through, get whichever phone you favor. If that is an iPhone, then jailbreak it. In either case, be freaking careful and know your stuff. If on the other hand you are a casual user that just wants to play with your gear in any way that it lets you, then you'll probably be safer with an iPhone. Your level of happiness with that decision may be inversely proportional to the number of Android (or jailbroken iPhone) capabilities you don't end up with.
Actually closer to 18 million per month going by current claims of 600K activations per day.
But that doesn't change my almost total agreement with the majority of your post.
Activations on unique devices after recalls or are we talking total units per month/day in these figures? Google doesn't seem to want to clarify yet Apple is very clear about the number of iPhone sales per quarter.
You can stop being afraid. I don't know any real stats, and I try to base my beliefs on verifiable evidence.
"Verifiable evidence" that just happens to skew heavily against Apple and heavily pro Android. Which suggests that you believe Android to be the superior platform. We see the "reasonable" type here all the time-- no histrionics, just always quick to reinforce whatever negative spin about Apple, Apple products or Apple's customers might be applicable, while being equally quick to discount mean talk about Android (or Windows or Linux or whoever et al).
Which is fine, but is just a slightly nuanced version of your own definition of "insecure" which affords you the luxury of pretending to be a dispassionate observer. I actually dislike your type more than the average partisan, because it's smug and dishonest.
Activations on unique devices after recalls or are we talking total units per month/day in these figures? Google doesn't seem to want to clarify yet Apple is very clear about the number of iPhone sales per quarter.
You're right. It might only be 500K Android devices actually bought and kept each day. The other 100K, 20%, could be returned. Highly unlikely, but certainly plausible to some people.
Different strokes for different folks. I'm glad for you.
The post above comparing Android and iOS to city living vs. a gated community is pretty accurate, IMO. Both types of situations appeal to different sorts of people.
Me, after living in an upscale 'burb for over 20 years, at the insistence of my ex-, I'm moving back into the city. And I'm very excited to be doing so.
Well of course you find the gated community metaphor accurate, it's exactly your kind of slightly veiled, draw-your-own conclusions slur. Not for you to just say that you think iOS is boring or for uptight white people or lacks that swashbuckling panache that all the cool kids covet. Just, you know, "different sorts of people."
But of course as metaphors go it's a hopeless hash. What things can you do with an Android phone that you can't do with an iPhone, beyond customizing some things? And how does that relate to the suburbs vs. the city again?
If you insist on this kind of comparison, the more accurate idea would be a city with urban planning compared to one without. In the latter case you get a more livable environment, where amenities are likely to be more easily accessed and standards of design are at least recommended. In the former you get sprawl, unintended consequences, and design/usability collisions that leave you scratching your head wondering what someone was thinking.
There's no reason why a well planned city with well enforced zoning can't be vibrant, exciting, diverse and engaging, just as there's no particular reason that a poorly planned/regulated city is somehow going to take on cool bohemian vibe that flatters one's sense of being a roguish player.
Unless you think Huston is mecca for free thinking?
Well this isn't really about Apple haters, it's about Android haters. How else would you describe people that do not use Android, yet spend a lot of time trying to convince others how insecure Android is? Do you really believe that anyone on Android fan sites spends time discussing how much iOS sucks? Newsflash: not everyone needs constant reassurance.
...but it IS insecure. And one of the hallmarks of quality products (be they film, book, art, tech, or even fast food service) is that people will discuss WHY the product is superior. Perhaps the reason few people rant about iOS on Android sites is the the same as why I never hear people ripping on In-And-Out while eating McDonalds. It has nothing to do with their innate security or lack of need for reassurance. When people talk about quality, it is only natural to talk about WHY it is quality. It has long been a problem that whenever two or more people get together to talk about why something is good, at least one other person, and usually more, are going to hate them for doing it. Rand said it best, "men hate passion." I enjoy quality films...and consequently get deemed as arrogant because their quality is exactly what I like about them. Should iOS fans apologize for talking about why they like something? It's only natural to contrast it with what Doesn't work. If I'm watching Independence Day and enjoying it for being a fun diversion, I have no need to compare it to anything. But if the reason I enjoy something precisely for it's quality, then of course I'm going to compare it to other things that do and do not match it. Everyone engages in this behavior, because that's how we learn what it is that works and what doesn't, what makes something better, and what doesn't. It isn't arrogance, it isn't self righteousness. When people find something that works wonderfully, they are happy to talk about how all the other products they tried didn't measure up. It's normal, healthy human behavior. If I had three tents that leaked, broke, or otherwise didn't work the way I wanted them to, I'm going to A) be excited about the tent that works the way I want, and contrast it with the others. This doesn't mean I'm a self righteous, kool-aid drinking tent fan. It isn't sinful to think one product is better than another. It isn't arrogant. If you were assured in your own opinion of android...why the need to rebut everyone?
Comments
I can see it now - first your show chaos and turmoil, pain and suffering, think medieval images of hell, then pan over to peace and light and joy, etc, think images of Heaven, then pull back to a sign that says Welcome to the Garden, then pull back a little farther and the sign is in the back of an Apple Store, then come down and zoom in as customer is handed their new iPhone and waved on towards the "pearly" gates.
Love it. Dante's Inferno comes to mind for the outside scene and it is out of copyright I assume.
Anyway, the study is biased. They should compare Androids with Cydia'd iPhones, which are most of them...
10% is most? Do you know what most means?
I hope you realize that observation goes both ways, but considering your posting history, I'm afraid you sincerely believe that iOS fanboys are somehow worse, or that there are many more of them.
You can stop being afraid. I don't know any real stats, and I try to base my beliefs on verifiable evidence.
I'm sorry that the meaning of my comment went so much above your head. Let's try again: Why do you need to discuss something that is sh1tty?
Why do you feel the need to hang out on/comment on an Apple website?
The fact is that the Google Marketplace is the Wild West -- rife with malware and malicious code, as these figures show.
The reason the App Store, with many more apps and many more sales, does not suffer from this is Apple's security measures.
Sometime when you buy the best, part of the fun is watching others who made poor choices suffering.
10% is most? Do you know what most means?
He thinks it means "Barely any? like totally less than 10% but a few more than 5%".
[I] think ... Android users are mostly juvenile angry young men with a chip on their shoulder ...
Reality: Most smartphone buyers choose Android.
Put that together with your thought, and ISTM inevitable that you must think that most current smartphone buyers are "juvenile angry young men with a chip on their shoulder".
You may be correct, but I have severe doubts. Got anything other than your thinking process to justify that conclusion?
(2) the best way to protect a computer operating system from stuff you couldn't anticipate (or fix) is by controlling the input methods (data and apps) rather than giving the user free reign to dump anything they find out there onto their computers
Why does Apple choose to forego the best way to protect OSX? They give their customers free reign to dump anything they find out there onto their Macs.
Why?
Reality: Most smartphone buyers choose Android. ...
This is not a true statement. It's more of an extrapolation by yourself based on some fairly dodgy reports of channel sales.
In truth I should have said "most Android lovers" or "most Android aficionado's" rather than "most Android users." A lot of folks use Android because that's what's sold to them, not because they choose it per se.
In any case, it was a statement of what I believe, not what I can prove, and was just a (perhaps poorly worded) preamble to my actual point.
This is not a true statement. It's more of an extrapolation by yourself based on some fairly dodgy reports of channel sales.
"Android dominates iOS in 2nd quarter, study finds"
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-20...r-study-finds/
Why does Apple choose to forego the best way to protect OSX? They give their customers free reign to dump anything they find out there onto their Macs.
Why?
Well there's a whole legacy thing there. Those worms were let out of the can long ago... long before the internet, in fact, and even longer before concerns of viruses were mainstream. It's difficult to abruptly force your long time users to stop doing things one way completely in favor of another. It's even more difficult to abruptly turn your back on the big software houses that still produce value added capabilities which can only be either side-loaded or downloaded from their sites. (Not that Apple hasn't done it on occasion!) If Apple forced users to only get their software through the Mac App store today, you would create a hole in the capability set of Macs. For the moment, that hole would be too large, and the Mac OS resurgence would falter. You can't pull off a stunt like that without some sort of dominance.
It seems to me that Apple is slowly trying to herd those worms back into the can. With the increased visibility and importance of the Mac App store in Lion, a greater fraction of Mac users will get used to obtaining their software that way. Eventually, if the big third party software houses play along, then Apple will lock Mac OS down too. But it is a long road, and I'm not utterly convinced that all the necessary software developers will play ball. If even one new killer application is created for PC's and/or Macs, but that developer does not want to utilize the Mac App store, then you might see a revolt. That would be one ballsy developer, though, and if the Mac OS share is large enough, it would be a case of cutting off your nose just to spite your face. We shall see.
Thompson
With a little bit of intelligence on where you source your apps, the kind of apps you install and checking out app permissions, you can easily avoid any trouble.
You forgot the easiest way to avoid trouble ..... just avoid Android, as 100s of millions of us are. Instead of worrying about .... "where you source your apps, the kind of apps you install and checking out app permissions", we just enjoy our Apple devices. Cheers!
Anyway, the study is biased. They should compare Androids with Cydia'd iPhones, which are most of them... and suddenly the picture is different. Or they should compare iPhones with Androids that only run Apps from the official store. Comparing Androids with unofficial stores and iPhones with no Cydia (again... very little subset) is just dishonnest.
Well, that depends on what you are trying to measure.
(1) If you are trying to measure the relative safety of the typical Android purchaser (over ten million per month) including his likely behaviors, versus the safety of the typical iPhone purchaser (a bit less than seven million per month last quarter) including his likely behaviors, then I would say it's appropriate to compare a general Android user (with people grabbing apps from wherever they can find them, at the recommendation of friends, etc) versus a non-jail-broken iPhone user. I would be willing to bet money that iPhones with no Cydia is the vast majority out there. You got Moms, Pops, Teens, Tweens, and Grandparents worldwide getting iPhones at the rate of 20+ million per quarter. I'd bet that 80% of them have never even heard of Cydia let alone jailbroken their phones.
(2) If you are trying to compare the relative safety of the underlying operating systems, as opposed to the walls erected around it, then I agree with your suggestion: compare a general Android phone with a jail-broken iPhone.
Note that the vast majority of consumers are more interested in the answer to number (1). (Edit: that is, if they even bother to ask! But the point of this article is that we are asking the question for them.) At the end of the day, they just want to know, "if I walk out of this store with this device in my hand and just use it however it lets me use it, what is my level of security?" It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that the answer is that iOS will provide more protection. But along with that comes the inflexibility that some people don't like. So they jail break their iPhone and ask the other question. In that case, my hunch is that at the end of the day both OS's are going to have enough vulnerabilities that it really won't make a difference which has more. The bottom line there is whether you are power-user enough to maintain your gear, which is a desirable quality if you jailbreak your iPhone anyway.
Conclusion: if you are a power user that wants to "own" his gear through and through, get whichever phone you favor. If that is an iPhone, then jailbreak it. In either case, be freaking careful and know your stuff. If on the other hand you are a casual user that just wants to play with your gear in any way that it lets you, then you'll probably be safer with an iPhone. Your level of happiness with that decision may be inversely proportional to the number of Android (or jailbroken iPhone) capabilities you don't end up with.
Thompson
Well, that depends on what you are trying to measure.
(1) If you are trying to measure the relative safety of the typical Android purchaser (over ten million per month) . . .
Actually closer to 18 million per month going by current claims of 600K activations per day.
But that doesn't change my almost total agreement with the majority of your post.
Actually closer to 18 million per month going by current claims of 600K activations per day.
But that doesn't change my almost total agreement with the majority of your post.
I wasn't sure what the number was, and didn't feel like looking it up, so I used the word "over" just to be safe and accurate.
Thompson
Actually closer to 18 million per month going by current claims of 600K activations per day.
But that doesn't change my almost total agreement with the majority of your post.
Activations on unique devices after recalls or are we talking total units per month/day in these figures? Google doesn't seem to want to clarify yet Apple is very clear about the number of iPhone sales per quarter.
You can stop being afraid. I don't know any real stats, and I try to base my beliefs on verifiable evidence.
"Verifiable evidence" that just happens to skew heavily against Apple and heavily pro Android. Which suggests that you believe Android to be the superior platform. We see the "reasonable" type here all the time-- no histrionics, just always quick to reinforce whatever negative spin about Apple, Apple products or Apple's customers might be applicable, while being equally quick to discount mean talk about Android (or Windows or Linux or whoever et al).
Which is fine, but is just a slightly nuanced version of your own definition of "insecure" which affords you the luxury of pretending to be a dispassionate observer. I actually dislike your type more than the average partisan, because it's smug and dishonest.
Activations on unique devices after recalls or are we talking total units per month/day in these figures? Google doesn't seem to want to clarify yet Apple is very clear about the number of iPhone sales per quarter.
You're right. It might only be 500K Android devices actually bought and kept each day. The other 100K, 20%, could be returned. Highly unlikely, but certainly plausible to some people.
Different strokes for different folks. I'm glad for you.
The post above comparing Android and iOS to city living vs. a gated community is pretty accurate, IMO. Both types of situations appeal to different sorts of people.
Me, after living in an upscale 'burb for over 20 years, at the insistence of my ex-, I'm moving back into the city. And I'm very excited to be doing so.
Well of course you find the gated community metaphor accurate, it's exactly your kind of slightly veiled, draw-your-own conclusions slur. Not for you to just say that you think iOS is boring or for uptight white people or lacks that swashbuckling panache that all the cool kids covet. Just, you know, "different sorts of people."
But of course as metaphors go it's a hopeless hash. What things can you do with an Android phone that you can't do with an iPhone, beyond customizing some things? And how does that relate to the suburbs vs. the city again?
If you insist on this kind of comparison, the more accurate idea would be a city with urban planning compared to one without. In the latter case you get a more livable environment, where amenities are likely to be more easily accessed and standards of design are at least recommended. In the former you get sprawl, unintended consequences, and design/usability collisions that leave you scratching your head wondering what someone was thinking.
There's no reason why a well planned city with well enforced zoning can't be vibrant, exciting, diverse and engaging, just as there's no particular reason that a poorly planned/regulated city is somehow going to take on cool bohemian vibe that flatters one's sense of being a roguish player.
Unless you think Huston is mecca for free thinking?
Well this isn't really about Apple haters, it's about Android haters. How else would you describe people that do not use Android, yet spend a lot of time trying to convince others how insecure Android is? Do you really believe that anyone on Android fan sites spends time discussing how much iOS sucks? Newsflash: not everyone needs constant reassurance.
...but it IS insecure. And one of the hallmarks of quality products (be they film, book, art, tech, or even fast food service) is that people will discuss WHY the product is superior. Perhaps the reason few people rant about iOS on Android sites is the the same as why I never hear people ripping on In-And-Out while eating McDonalds. It has nothing to do with their innate security or lack of need for reassurance. When people talk about quality, it is only natural to talk about WHY it is quality. It has long been a problem that whenever two or more people get together to talk about why something is good, at least one other person, and usually more, are going to hate them for doing it. Rand said it best, "men hate passion." I enjoy quality films...and consequently get deemed as arrogant because their quality is exactly what I like about them. Should iOS fans apologize for talking about why they like something? It's only natural to contrast it with what Doesn't work. If I'm watching Independence Day and enjoying it for being a fun diversion, I have no need to compare it to anything. But if the reason I enjoy something precisely for it's quality, then of course I'm going to compare it to other things that do and do not match it. Everyone engages in this behavior, because that's how we learn what it is that works and what doesn't, what makes something better, and what doesn't. It isn't arrogance, it isn't self righteousness. When people find something that works wonderfully, they are happy to talk about how all the other products they tried didn't measure up. It's normal, healthy human behavior. If I had three tents that leaked, broke, or otherwise didn't work the way I wanted them to, I'm going to A) be excited about the tent that works the way I want, and