citpeks
About
- Username
- citpeks
- Joined
- Visits
- 334
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 1,007
- Badges
- 1
- Posts
- 271
Reactions
-
Apple hires new HomePod Software Head to boost lackluster speaker sales
Apple needs to get its house in order, so to speak, pursue a cohesive home automation strategy, and improve Siri.Who wouldn't welcome doorbells, security cams, speakers, or other IoT products from a company with a privacy-minded bent, and done with the polish one expects (or at least used to) from Apple?They could all connect with a "Super AppleTV" that serves as a hub, tied to iCloud services on the back end. Multiple units could even serve as a mesh.Apple had the leads with Siri and HomeKit, but has squandered them. Siri hasn't gotten much smarter, and HomeKit was too complicated to implement, ceding the home space to Google and Amazon. which are both happy to data mine their users.Re-hiring a guy to fix only the speakers reflects a distinct lack of vision the company has in this segment.
-
iPhone gets USB-C thanks to creative robotics engineer
shamino said:I don't think it's so much a matter of want to as one of see a clear benefit.USB-C is very trendy right now, and the new EU law is definitely going to have an impact on Apple's business logic, but there are other things that they need to consider in addition, including:- Cost to add higher speed communication to the iPhone. If a USB-C iPhone continues to use USB 2.0 data rates, that eliminates much of the technical advantage.
- Other Lightening capabilities. Lightening was originally designed to replace the 30-pin Dock connector, which had several things like analog A/V, that Lightening later incorporated. I don't know how many of these features are still used, but they will be important to any transition plan. For instance, a Lightening headphone adapter only has to (as far as I know) identify itself as such (via the ID chip) and then connect the analog I/O pins to the connector - so it can be a cheap and simple adapter. But a USB-C adapter needs to include a full USB audio interface into that adapter.
- Ticking off existing customers. People over the years have bought a lot of Lightening-based devices. When Apple dropped the 30-pin connector, there was a lot of complaining from people who had to toss out peripherals or buy adapters. The Lightening-based ecosystem is even bigger and will probably generate an even bigger wave of complaints.
Ultimately, it is (as you wrote) a business decision, but there are a lot of factors involved. It's not just a matter of whether Apple management "wants to".Type-C is a connector standard, not a data or power delivery standard. Examples of the latter, such as 20Gbps USB 3.2 Gen 2x2, or PD, may require the connector, but the reverse does not apply. Apple has thus far seen no need to implement higher than 2.0 speeds on iPhones, and could switch to Type-C without any penalty. And, if a $499 iPad Air 4 s capable of 5Gbps USB 3.2G1 speeds, there's little reason an $700 or $1000 iPhone could not, based on cost. The USB IF has made every effort to push Type-C as the universal connector to fulfill any and every purpose,, so it does not represent a technical constraint.Lighting is a digital port. There is analog out. Apple's Lighting to 3.5mm headphone adapter contains a (very good) DAC/amp. As does the USB-C version. The Lighting dongles look simple, but do essential work in providing their various connections.There are little to no technical or cost rationales why Apple cannot employ Type-C on the iPhone, They already produce and sell millions of iOS devices that have USB-C; the technical work has been done, and the support is there. They just happen to have larger screens, run a slightly different version of the OS, and are called iPads.One could argue the reluctance is due a desire to support users' investments in Lighting accessories, but Apple is a forward-looking company that did not shy away from moving away from the Dock connector, or go all-in with USB with the original iMac, and force users to go cold turkey. The legacy support argument fades more and more as time passes, USB-C adoption rises, and more users find Lighting to be a practical hindrance.What is hard to ignore is the the MFi licensing program, including the Lighting connector, Watch charging cables, and MagSafe chargers is also a business for the company, and one it is reluctant to give up, until forced to, whether by the market, or the regulators.Personally, I have no strong inclination to go either way.. I admire Lightning as a connector, and prefer it to Type-C in that respect. But as a practical matter, it would also be nice to not have to carry a separate cable for the iPhone, but the Watch also requires one, and in that sense, it's a minor inconvenience at most.
-
Android executive offers to help Apple deploy RCS messaging
jamesnay said:There’s enough negative tribalism going on in the world… if adopting RCS helps eliminate the us vs them mentality I’m all for it!I've never understood the supposed stigma surrounding the blue/green bubble thing. But I guess, as with a lot of things, people have to find stupid things to occupy their head with.Apple isn't going to adopt RCS until it has to. With the plethora of messaging apps and platforms available, I'm guessing it might never come. And it certainly won't until RCS is fully-baked, which is apparently not the case even for Android users.But, if for no other reason, it should, to help put SMS in the past, and move away from its weaknesses, to a more modern standard. The recent reveal of the data breach is just another reminder of why that needs to happen, and for companies and organizations to stop using at as a means of 2FA.
-
Apple patched an iOS lock screen bypass without crediting its discovery
slow n easy said:
It looks like just about everyone who has commented so far has the same opinion about this guy. However, the article doesn’t state that he was looking for either compensation or credit. Maybe he didn’t do through the Bug Bounty Program because he didn’t want to be disappointed. Maybe he was just trying to be a “Good Samaritan “ and not expecting credit.lkrupp said:As the article says, the researcher did not report the bug to Apple but published the exploit on social media. Now he wants recognition and compensation? Fuck him.That's a fair point.But it's difficult to accept that a reputable "security researcher," who has been through the process, and should be familiar with the protocol surrounding things such as responsible disclosure, discovers a bug, doesn't notify the company, publicly publishes the exploit…and then casually notes that it has been fixed without acknowledgement.This isn't a case where a random user stumbles across an odd behavior, then demonstrates it in search of an explanation, or some sort of solution.What has been demonstrated is a kind of passive aggressive behavior with the intent to embarrass the company, and attempt to send some sort of subtle message, probably due to some kind of discontent or personal beef he has with Apple. If you have any doubt about his stance, look at his Twitter feed.One would have to be foolish to fail to see through his act, and buy into whatever weak plausible deniability that might be suggested.There is no doubt Apple has issues, including how it runs its bug bounty program, and responds to its bug reports, but settling fire to a store where the clerk is rude to you, while other shoppers are inside, and then scurrying away to dial 911 and pretend to be the hero, isn't the way to resolve the issue. That's weak bullshit. -
Apple patched an iOS lock screen bypass without crediting its discovery
Correct me if I'm wrong, I haven't been following this closely, but from what has been written here, this is how I read it:1) Researcher discovers (another) bug, but as a means of protest and to draw attention, opts not to report new bug to Apple through the proper channels, and exposes it in a YouTube video instead. The "gives away" part, whether a direct quote or not, suggests researcher is wiling to forego the compensation, if not the credit, for the new discovery.2) Apple fixes bug, without acknowledgement, or compensation.3) Researcher now bemoaning the lack of credit/compensation, for a bug that wasn't reported, or formally submitted through established channels, just YouTube.4) This is a researcher who has gone through the procedure before, and has been acknowledged, and compensated by Apple for that discovery, of another lock screen bug. He may have his issues with the system, but he cannot claim to not know how it works.This, of course, doesn't preclude the possibility that Apple may have discovered the bug on its own, treated it as an internal patch, however unlikely that might be. There's also the possibility that is was indirectly mitigated as a side effect from patches made for other purposes. I'm not aware of the expected disclosure requirements of bugs found internally, or how closely they are enforced, but CVEs apply to publicly known vulnerabilities. Does a YouTube video formally qualify?All I know is that ignoring, and making it a point to flout the system, however messed up you may think it is, might not be the best way to achieve the desired outcome, or effect change.Such tactics are cheap, and pander to the lowest common denominator, and/or those incapable of applying critical thinking.
