5 ms·

What’s the alternative you propose?

by noncoml 7y ago

Scarbutt 7y ago
Push for an open platform like the web, although google will soon have a big grip on it with its chrome domination.
- noncoml 7y ago
  There is no money in that.
dahfizz 7y ago
At least on Android you can install and run any software you want. Google provides an app store but it does not lock you in like apple does.
- jakear 7y ago
  Has anyone complied a list of security vulnerabilities for iOS vs Android over the years? To my eye, it looks like I see articles about android vulnerabilities much more often (and searching for “android security vulnerability exposes” vs “iPhone (or iOS) security vulnerability exposes” seems to back that up.
  - DownGoat 7y ago
    You can search the CVE database, but it will give you a lot of vulnerabilities that were detected in apps on the platforms, and not only the platform itself. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=android https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=android
  - whenchamenia 7y ago
    I would counter most IOS vulns generalize across more devices, as iphones are a reletive monoculture compared to the huge array of android devices. So even ignoring popularity differences, numbers alone will not tell much about which is more secure for the end user. Some type of apples to aplles comparison, would indeed be interesting.
- neuronic 7y ago
  I take long-term security updates over running Clicker Heroes and an adtech OS.
  - floe 7y ago
    In theory, the market could push Android manufacturers to offer longer support terms. In practice... not really, so, fair point.
  - loup-vaillant 7y ago
    Valuing security over freedom, huh? Remimds me of a quote about deserving neither… (Besides, I have a Nexus 5 from six years ago, the updates are still coming…) Okay, Google's privacy's suck. I'm definitely unhappy about it. But let's not forget Apple's lock down sucks just as hard. I'd even go as far as saying that this exclusive store thing should be forbidden. People should have root rights over their phone, and Apple should be forbidden to prevent them. Instead, people can get in legal trouble from sharing information about jailbreaking.
    - neuronic 7y ago
      > Valuing security over freedom If I do banking on my mobile device, then yes, I value security. I also value security, when the device contains a non-negligible amount of personal information that tends to be valuable in certain scenarios. It's not some ephemeral boogeyman threat management you seem to make it out to be. For me, this IS freedom (from Google's invasive practices and questionable business decisions). I choose Apple because due to their business model they at least have far less motivation to sell my data to the Chinese or other entities. Of course we cannot know the true behind-the-scenes. > Apple's lock down sucks just as hard Does it for the vast majority of users who don't need to ssh into their phone for (at best) tinkering reasons? How many people are seriously feeling the negative impact here? I'd argue that the majority of non-tech-savvy users are better of this way. Even as a developer, I am not missing anything in the App Store. Questionable decisions by Apple have so far not collided with my interests but that is too selfish of an argument to make, I suppose. Although I do assume that it holds true for a very high percentage of users. I am open for opposing points.
- s_dev 7y ago
  It's an alternative but not without flaws either -- which just measns a trade offf -- the Play store suffers problems that the App Store doesn't. e.g. Apps that are simply removed without explanation and a huge spam problem -- malicious apps have gotten to the top of the Play Store. What we need is more compitition -- this duopoly is too polaraizing and binary for something as complex as modern mobile phones.
darkpuma 7y ago
Consumers are stuck between a rock and a hard place. Would you tell consumers to stop complaining about the rock?
- noncoml 7y ago
  My question was genuine
  - darkpuma 7y ago
    Fair enough. Both mainstream choices suck for different reasons, and all other choices suffer from not being mainstream. It's a shit situation.
soup10 7y ago
the alternative is allowing any software that isn't a virus or illegal to be installed... just like pc's have done for decades
- noncoml 7y ago
  No control of what’s installed and what not means no control over the money
  - soup10 7y ago
    they make far more money from device sales than they do from apps. they just don't want to give up their gatekeeping power
- r3bl 7y ago
  Even that should be optional. I should be able to do with my device whatever I want to — including bricking it, deliberately compromising it (for whatever reason), and installing a different OS on top of it. Of course, there should be some sane defaults that prevent me from it, but if I really wished to, I should be able to do one (or twenty) deliberate action(s) that make that possible.

What’s the alternative you propose?

Scarbutt 7y ago

Push for an open platform like the web, although google will soon have a big grip on it with its chrome domination.

noncoml 7y ago
There is no money in that.

dahfizz 7y ago

At least on Android you can install and run any software you want. Google provides an app store but it does not lock you in like apple does.

jakear 7y ago
Has anyone complied a list of security vulnerabilities for iOS vs Android over the years? To my eye, it looks like I see articles about android vulnerabilities much more often (and searching for “android security vulnerability exposes” vs “iPhone (or iOS) security vulnerability exposes” seems to back that up.
- DownGoat 7y ago
  You can search the CVE database, but it will give you a lot of vulnerabilities that were detected in apps on the platforms, and not only the platform itself. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=android https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=android
- whenchamenia 7y ago
  I would counter most IOS vulns generalize across more devices, as iphones are a reletive monoculture compared to the huge array of android devices. So even ignoring popularity differences, numbers alone will not tell much about which is more secure for the end user. Some type of apples to aplles comparison, would indeed be interesting.
neuronic 7y ago
I take long-term security updates over running Clicker Heroes and an adtech OS.
- floe 7y ago
  In theory, the market could push Android manufacturers to offer longer support terms. In practice... not really, so, fair point.
- loup-vaillant 7y ago
  Valuing security over freedom, huh? Remimds me of a quote about deserving neither… (Besides, I have a Nexus 5 from six years ago, the updates are still coming…) Okay, Google's privacy's suck. I'm definitely unhappy about it. But let's not forget Apple's lock down sucks just as hard. I'd even go as far as saying that this exclusive store thing should be forbidden. People should have root rights over their phone, and Apple should be forbidden to prevent them. Instead, people can get in legal trouble from sharing information about jailbreaking.
  - neuronic 7y ago
    > Valuing security over freedom If I do banking on my mobile device, then yes, I value security. I also value security, when the device contains a non-negligible amount of personal information that tends to be valuable in certain scenarios. It's not some ephemeral boogeyman threat management you seem to make it out to be. For me, this IS freedom (from Google's invasive practices and questionable business decisions). I choose Apple because due to their business model they at least have far less motivation to sell my data to the Chinese or other entities. Of course we cannot know the true behind-the-scenes. > Apple's lock down sucks just as hard Does it for the vast majority of users who don't need to ssh into their phone for (at best) tinkering reasons? How many people are seriously feeling the negative impact here? I'd argue that the majority of non-tech-savvy users are better of this way. Even as a developer, I am not missing anything in the App Store. Questionable decisions by Apple have so far not collided with my interests but that is too selfish of an argument to make, I suppose. Although I do assume that it holds true for a very high percentage of users. I am open for opposing points.
s_dev 7y ago
It's an alternative but not without flaws either -- which just measns a trade offf -- the Play store suffers problems that the App Store doesn't. e.g. Apps that are simply removed without explanation and a huge spam problem -- malicious apps have gotten to the top of the Play Store. What we need is more compitition -- this duopoly is too polaraizing and binary for something as complex as modern mobile phones.

darkpuma 7y ago

Consumers are stuck between a rock and a hard place. Would you tell consumers to stop complaining about the rock?

noncoml 7y ago
My question was genuine
- darkpuma 7y ago
  Fair enough. Both mainstream choices suck for different reasons, and all other choices suffer from not being mainstream. It's a shit situation.

soup10 7y ago

the alternative is allowing any software that isn't a virus or illegal to be installed... just like pc's have done for decades

noncoml 7y ago
No control of what’s installed and what not means no control over the money
- soup10 7y ago
  they make far more money from device sales than they do from apps. they just don't want to give up their gatekeeping power
r3bl 7y ago
Even that should be optional. I should be able to do with my device whatever I want to — including bricking it, deliberately compromising it (for whatever reason), and installing a different OS on top of it. Of course, there should be some sane defaults that prevent me from it, but if I really wished to, I should be able to do one (or twenty) deliberate action(s) that make that possible.