4 ms·
And your condescension is irritating. Apple seems pretty solid on the protection of users' privacy. Devices are encrypted by default, for example, and there ar
by matthewmacleod 11y ago
And your condescension is irritating.
Apple seems pretty solid on the protection of users' privacy. Devices are encrypted by default, for example, and there are robust protections from rogue applications in place.
Is there are specific practice that Apple engage in that makes you think they are particularly reckless regarding users' privacy?
- lern_too_spel 11y agoHe's comparing Apple to Google. In that respect, Apple comes out looking pretty bad. Google's devices are also encrypted by default and have much more robust protections against rogue applications in place (both static and dynamic automated analysis of apps for malware, vs. just a human eyeballing it).
- IBM 11y agoAndroid devices aren't encrypted by default, Google backtracked on that. http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/03/google-quietly-backs-away-from-encrypting-new-lollipop-devices-by-default/ http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/03/google-quietly-backs-...
- mike_hearn 11y agoNew ones are, I think. The Nexus 6 is. Older devices don't necessarily get upgraded. It's a hardware/software issue, not a philosophical issue.
- lern_too_spel 11y agoGoogle devices are, as I said. Mentioning that other Android devices aren't is like saying other Linux distros don't use RPM in response to a statement that Redhat does.
- x0054 11y agoSo are iOS devices that have a passcode and are running iOS 8, and with fingerprint scanning a lot more people have password locked devices. Good article on the subject is here: http://www.darthnull.org/2014/10/06/ios-encryption http://www.darthnull.org/2014/10/06/ios-encryption
- x0054 11y agoAnd yet, with all that wonderful "automated" malware checking Google is also now manually reviewing App. http://blog.lifars.com/2015/03/18/google-now-manually-reviews-apps-in-its-android-play-store/ http://blog.lifars.com/2015/03/18/google-now-manually-review...
- lern_too_spel 11y agoHow does the addition of manual checks against the distribution policies change the fact that Google's malware checking is better than Apple's?
- x0054 11y agoI don't understand what makes you say that Google's malware checking system is superior to Apple's. Do you have a source for that? Do you have a source to the way Apple in general does their app vetting, or Google for that matter. At this point you are basically saying: "Google is better because I said so." Do you have evidence that Apple does NOT run an automated virus and malware scan, resource analysis, or any other automated malware detection on their apps before adding them to the queue to also be manually checked. Just because Apples does manual checking it does NOT mean that they completely forego automatic checking. Just like the fact that Google did automatic checking did not prevent them to also implement a manual checking system. Nowadays both companies do a pretty good job vetting App submissions, though Apple also filters on quality (sometimes) where as Google does not, but that's within each companies respective philosophies, and can be considered a strength or a weakness, depending on your own philosophy.
- lern_too_spel 11y agoDo you have evidence that Apple does? They have made no claims that they do, instead continuously pointing to human vetting as their filter on malware, which is laughable. We all know that unskilled contractors stepping through some policy checklist aren't a legitimate protection against malware, but it's enough to fool people like Gruber, many bloggers, and you 14 hours ago before I pointed out your mistake.