4 ms·

Their report only analyzes the criticality of Windows-based exploits, and leaves Oracle and Apple bugs' severity undefined. I can't find anywhere on Secunia's

by kaiuhl 16y ago

Their report only analyzes the criticality of Windows-based exploits, and leaves Oracle and Apple bugs' severity undefined. I can't find anywhere on Secunia's website that they make a big deal out of this though, so I'm going to chock it up to Arstechnica being sensationalist.

brianpan 16y ago
I also noticed Ars becoming much more anti-Apple as well as sensationalist. Articles like Siracusa coverage on the antenna press conference as well as his twitter feed seemed oddly vindictive to me. http://arstechnica.com/staff/fatbits/2010/07/unanswered-questions-unearned-trust.ars http://arstechnica.com/staff/fatbits/2010/07/unanswered-ques... I found it unsettling considering Ars has been a top source of tech news for me in the past that I thought was very even and thorough.
- gbhn 16y ago
  Have you considered that an even and thorough approach to tech news may go through periods where it levels more criticism than usual at Apple?
  - brianpan 16y ago
    Of course, one great reason to be more critical is if they deserve it. I don't think that it's merited in these cases (original article or my link). I'm trying to figure out if this is a temporary/isolated thing, a systemic change, or a figment of my imagination/biases.
    - brianpan 16y ago
      Ok, it's not just my imagination, this is link-bait if I ever saw it: http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2010/07/international-launch-causes-rehash-of-iphone-4-antenna-issue.ars http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2010/07/international-laun... Title is: iPhone 4 antenna woes "significantly worse" than competition 1st paragraph explains: one consulting firm says it's worse, another review says it's better. I'm pretty sure I didn't see this type of thing from Ars in the past.
- nitrogen 16y ago
  Whenever I think a site that was even and thorough is becoming biased, I have to ask myself if they were actually biased before, but are now becoming more fair. Sometimes I conclude that I was the one who was biased.

by kaiuhl 16y ago

brianpan 16y ago

I also noticed Ars becoming much more anti-Apple as well as sensationalist. Articles like Siracusa coverage on the antenna press conference as well as his twitter feed seemed oddly vindictive to me. http://arstechnica.com/staff/fatbits/2010/07/unanswered-questions-unearned-trust.ars http://arstechnica.com/staff/fatbits/2010/07/unanswered-ques... I found it unsettling considering Ars has been a top source of tech news for me in the past that I thought was very even and thorough.

gbhn 16y ago
Have you considered that an even and thorough approach to tech news may go through periods where it levels more criticism than usual at Apple?
- brianpan 16y ago
  Of course, one great reason to be more critical is if they deserve it. I don't think that it's merited in these cases (original article or my link). I'm trying to figure out if this is a temporary/isolated thing, a systemic change, or a figment of my imagination/biases.
  - brianpan 16y ago
    Ok, it's not just my imagination, this is link-bait if I ever saw it: http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2010/07/international-launch-causes-rehash-of-iphone-4-antenna-issue.ars http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2010/07/international-laun... Title is: iPhone 4 antenna woes "significantly worse" than competition 1st paragraph explains: one consulting firm says it's worse, another review says it's better. I'm pretty sure I didn't see this type of thing from Ars in the past.
nitrogen 16y ago
Whenever I think a site that was even and thorough is becoming biased, I have to ask myself if they were actually biased before, but are now becoming more fair. Sometimes I conclude that I was the one who was biased.