6 ms·

Lenovo's malware scandal should certainly give you pause, but do note that it was only installed on its consumer laptops. Thinkpads were unaffected. Moreover,

by cyrus_ 10y ago

Lenovo's malware scandal should certainly give you pause, but do note that it was only installed on its consumer laptops. Thinkpads were unaffected. Moreover, Apple is far from the cleanly ethical choice you seem to think it is. It blocks or impedes the installation of software that it has unilaterally decided is against its interests + takes a ludicrous percentage of revenue via the App Store.

voidlogic 10y ago
>Lenovo's malware scandal should certainly give you pause, but do note that it was only installed on its consumer laptops. Thinkpads were unaffected. And would not matter if you were installing Linux per this thread...
- vardump 10y ago
  Operating system doesn't matter much when the malware is in BIOS or firmware code.
  - voidlogic 10y ago
    >Operating system doesn't matter much when the malware is in BIOS or firmware code. Are you insinuating that was the case here? Source please, I'd be interested to read about that.
    - voltagex_ 10y ago
      https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150812/11395231925/lenovo-busted-stealthily-installing-crapware-via-bios-fresh-windows-installs.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150812/11395231925/lenov...
    - Figs 10y ago
      Here are three news articles on what happened: http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/08/lenovo-used-windows-anti-theft-feature-to-install-persistent-crapware/ http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/08/lenovo... http://www.techrepublic.com/article/windows-and-uefi-anti-theft-mechanism-makes-systems-less-secure/ http://www.techrepublic.com/article/windows-and-uefi-anti-th... http://www.pcworld.com/article/2969365/security/lenovos-service-engine-marks-yet-another-bloatware-blunder-for-the-company.html http://www.pcworld.com/article/2969365/security/lenovos-serv... This should really only affect Windows systems as far as I know -- Windows is running an executable stored in the firmware at boot (a rather dubious feature, in my opinion, but it's intended as an anti-theft measure). Lenovo used that feature to try to circumvent removal of their crapware when someone reinstalls the OS.
    - betanumerical 10y ago
      It gets copied from the firmware and runs pre OS. But the executable only runs on windows from what I can tell, so its technically its cross platform but it wont run on both platforms.
      - pritambaral 10y ago
        The executable runs on Windows because Windows loads it and runs it. The executable doesn't force itself on Windows.
    - vardump 10y ago
      For example SMM (system management mode) code is certainly loaded and executed under any operating system. You have to just trust the mainboard vendor. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_Management_Mode https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_Management_Mode I'm not insinuating anything. All I know is that Lenovo broke our collective trust before, thinking they can get away with it.
  - tinus_hn 10y ago
    The 'malware' used a Windows misfeature that allows the BIOS to supply an executable that is run during startup. So the malware was in the firmware but only runs on Windows.
megablast 10y ago
> takes a ludicrous percentage of revenue via the App Store. Do you know what it was before the Apple App store came along? You were handing over about 70-80%, and that was if you could convince a publisher to take your app, which was a very hard sell. Then Apple came along offering EVERYONE the ability to publish apps, and at a very reasonable cost.
- mikeash 10y ago
  You could throw up a web site and an online store and sell directly for nothing close to that. If you used a full-featured sales service, you might pay 8%. If you put in the work to run your own store that works with a merchant account, you could get it down to maybe 3%. The alternative to the App Store isn't selling through a huge publisher who takes a huge cut, it's selling directly and keeping almost all of the money.
- cyrus_ 10y ago
  No, then _the internet_ came along, offering EVERYONE the ability to publish apps, at an actually very reasonable cost.
givinguflac 10y ago
Please provide one example of Apple blocking an application from running on MacOS. What's that, you don't have an example? Because this is false.
- cyrus_ 10y ago
  First off, I didn't say that Apple was blocking apps on MacOS. I mentioned it because the OP was disparaging Lenovo as a whole because of unethical behavior in one product line. As such, it's only fair to do the same for Apple. Second, Apple most definitely does "impede" the installation of apps downloaded independently by requiring you to perform an obscure dance to execute them.
  - rarepostinlurkr 10y ago
    > "It blocks or impedes the installation of software ..." You didn't?
    - cyrus_ 10y ago
      You're aware that iPhones and iPads run software I assume.
  - nicky0 10y ago
    You only have to to the "right click and Open" dance if app is unsigned. Even for unsigned apps, I don't thing two clicks instead of one is all that obscure.
eridius 10y ago
> It blocks or impedes the installation of software that it has unilaterally decided is against its interests What software are you thinking of? Apple maintains editorial control over what's in the App Store, but I can't think of any case where Apple has blocked software distributed outside the app store. The closest I can think of is the fact that the default settings of the computer require apps to be codesigned with an Apple certificate, but Apple doesn't maintain editorial control over who gets certificates, anyone with a developer account can get one (and of course you can even bypass this requirement with right click -> Open, or by changing the security settings on the computer). > takes a ludicrous percentage of revenue via the App Store The App Store is completely optional. All software that's published on it can be distributed outside of it. And I don't see how the percentage Apple takes from their completely optional App Store is even remotely connected with ethics.
- cyrus_ 10y ago
  An Apple developer account costs $99/year. The ethical problem on macOS is that Apple is imposing artificial technical barriers to push people to pay Apple what amounts to "protection" money. On iOS, there is no reasonable way to bypass the app store for the vast majority of users.
  - eridius 10y ago
    The fact that you apparently don't understand the security implications here and the reasons why Apple is pushing for codesigning does not mean that Apple is putting up artificial barriers out of greed. That's a pretty ludicrous claim - do you really think the $99/year Apple gets from developers (who aren't already paying for iOS) even registers as a blip on their balance sheets? The next time you see something you don't understand, your automatic reaction shouldn't be "those greedy bastards", it should be to actually educate yourself as to why it's being done. You may find that in a lot of cases there are actually really good reasons for it. And even if you decide that you don't agree with the reasons, that doesn't make it appropriate to accuse someone of being greedy or doing "evil" things (e.g. artificial technology barriers to extract money), and it's rather offensive for you to do that.

by cyrus_ 10y ago

voidlogic 10y ago

>Lenovo's malware scandal should certainly give you pause, but do note that it was only installed on its consumer laptops. Thinkpads were unaffected. And would not matter if you were installing Linux per this thread...

vardump 10y ago
Operating system doesn't matter much when the malware is in BIOS or firmware code.
- voidlogic 10y ago
  >Operating system doesn't matter much when the malware is in BIOS or firmware code. Are you insinuating that was the case here? Source please, I'd be interested to read about that.
  - voltagex_ 10y ago
    https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150812/11395231925/lenovo-busted-stealthily-installing-crapware-via-bios-fresh-windows-installs.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150812/11395231925/lenov...
  - Figs 10y ago
    Here are three news articles on what happened: http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/08/lenovo-used-windows-anti-theft-feature-to-install-persistent-crapware/ http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/08/lenovo... http://www.techrepublic.com/article/windows-and-uefi-anti-theft-mechanism-makes-systems-less-secure/ http://www.techrepublic.com/article/windows-and-uefi-anti-th... http://www.pcworld.com/article/2969365/security/lenovos-service-engine-marks-yet-another-bloatware-blunder-for-the-company.html http://www.pcworld.com/article/2969365/security/lenovos-serv... This should really only affect Windows systems as far as I know -- Windows is running an executable stored in the firmware at boot (a rather dubious feature, in my opinion, but it's intended as an anti-theft measure). Lenovo used that feature to try to circumvent removal of their crapware when someone reinstalls the OS.
  - betanumerical 10y ago
    It gets copied from the firmware and runs pre OS. But the executable only runs on windows from what I can tell, so its technically its cross platform but it wont run on both platforms.
    - pritambaral 10y ago
      The executable runs on Windows because Windows loads it and runs it. The executable doesn't force itself on Windows.
  - vardump 10y ago
    For example SMM (system management mode) code is certainly loaded and executed under any operating system. You have to just trust the mainboard vendor. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_Management_Mode https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_Management_Mode I'm not insinuating anything. All I know is that Lenovo broke our collective trust before, thinking they can get away with it.
- tinus_hn 10y ago
  The 'malware' used a Windows misfeature that allows the BIOS to supply an executable that is run during startup. So the malware was in the firmware but only runs on Windows.

megablast 10y ago

> takes a ludicrous percentage of revenue via the App Store. Do you know what it was before the Apple App store came along? You were handing over about 70-80%, and that was if you could convince a publisher to take your app, which was a very hard sell. Then Apple came along offering EVERYONE the ability to publish apps, and at a very reasonable cost.

mikeash 10y ago
You could throw up a web site and an online store and sell directly for nothing close to that. If you used a full-featured sales service, you might pay 8%. If you put in the work to run your own store that works with a merchant account, you could get it down to maybe 3%. The alternative to the App Store isn't selling through a huge publisher who takes a huge cut, it's selling directly and keeping almost all of the money.
cyrus_ 10y ago
No, then _the internet_ came along, offering EVERYONE the ability to publish apps, at an actually very reasonable cost.

givinguflac 10y ago

Please provide one example of Apple blocking an application from running on MacOS. What's that, you don't have an example? Because this is false.

cyrus_ 10y ago
First off, I didn't say that Apple was blocking apps on MacOS. I mentioned it because the OP was disparaging Lenovo as a whole because of unethical behavior in one product line. As such, it's only fair to do the same for Apple. Second, Apple most definitely does "impede" the installation of apps downloaded independently by requiring you to perform an obscure dance to execute them.
- rarepostinlurkr 10y ago
  > "It blocks or impedes the installation of software ..." You didn't?
  - cyrus_ 10y ago
    You're aware that iPhones and iPads run software I assume.
- nicky0 10y ago
  You only have to to the "right click and Open" dance if app is unsigned. Even for unsigned apps, I don't thing two clicks instead of one is all that obscure.

eridius 10y ago

> It blocks or impedes the installation of software that it has unilaterally decided is against its interests What software are you thinking of? Apple maintains editorial control over what's in the App Store, but I can't think of any case where Apple has blocked software distributed outside the app store. The closest I can think of is the fact that the default settings of the computer require apps to be codesigned with an Apple certificate, but Apple doesn't maintain editorial control over who gets certificates, anyone with a developer account can get one (and of course you can even bypass this requirement with right click -> Open, or by changing the security settings on the computer). > takes a ludicrous percentage of revenue via the App Store The App Store is completely optional. All software that's published on it can be distributed outside of it. And I don't see how the percentage Apple takes from their completely optional App Store is even remotely connected with ethics.

cyrus_ 10y ago
An Apple developer account costs $99/year. The ethical problem on macOS is that Apple is imposing artificial technical barriers to push people to pay Apple what amounts to "protection" money. On iOS, there is no reasonable way to bypass the app store for the vast majority of users.
- eridius 10y ago
  The fact that you apparently don't understand the security implications here and the reasons why Apple is pushing for codesigning does not mean that Apple is putting up artificial barriers out of greed. That's a pretty ludicrous claim - do you really think the $99/year Apple gets from developers (who aren't already paying for iOS) even registers as a blip on their balance sheets? The next time you see something you don't understand, your automatic reaction shouldn't be "those greedy bastards", it should be to actually educate yourself as to why it's being done. You may find that in a lot of cases there are actually really good reasons for it. And even if you decide that you don't agree with the reasons, that doesn't make it appropriate to accuse someone of being greedy or doing "evil" things (e.g. artificial technology barriers to extract money), and it's rather offensive for you to do that.