walled garden not so bad after all..

[Maggie Leung]

Are there estimates on how many iPad buyers actually jailbreak?

[scottjl]

well iphone estimates were at less than 10%. i wouldn't expect the ipad to be any more. so if there are approx 3.5M ipads sold by now, figure 350k people. not that many, at best.

[Maggie Leung]

Interesting. Doesn't sound like many. Of course, many people aren't technical and just want the basics. I read that a good number of iPhone owners don't even add apps to their phones. I guess they just use whatever's included already.

Scott, can you point me to a link talking about AT&T possibly locking down its Android store?

[paulckennedy]

The thing that is scary is that on Android, it actually tells you what the app will have access to. I don't believe that I get as detailed permission requests from apps when I install them on my iPad.

Buyer beware as always. Sometimes Free costs you more than you thought.

[scottjl]

http://www.phonenews.com/dell-tells-...ed-apps-10635/

there ya go maggie, google and you'll find links to other articles.

iOS apps give you warnings as well before they do imports from your address book. apple has only started allowing access to the calendar. playlist information has to come through official APIs as well. since apple checks out every app they can easily tell what apps are accessing what (going through official APIs).

[Maggie Leung]

Originally Posted by paulckennedy

The thing that is scary is that on Android, it actually tells you what the app will have access to. I don't believe that I get as detailed permission requests from apps when I install them on my iPad.

Buyer beware as always. Sometimes Free costs you more than you thought.

Yes, I think it's always the case, free or not.

Even when I buy from Apple, I figure I'm taking risks. No company can protect you completely, and if any one of them says so, it's a lie.

[Maggie Leung]

Originally Posted by scottjl

http://www.phonenews.com/dell-tells-...ed-apps-10635/

there ya go maggie, google and you'll find links to other articles.

iOS apps give you warnings as well before they do imports from your address book. apple has only started allowing access to the calendar. playlist information has to come through official APIs as well. since apple checks out every app they can easily tell what apps are accessing what (going through official APIs).

Thanks, Scott. I'm very interested, because I'm checking out the Dell Streak.

[paulckennedy]

Originally Posted by Maggie Leung

Yes, I think it's always the case, free or not.

Even when I buy from Apple, I figure I'm taking risks. No company can protect you completely, and if any one of them says so, it's a lie.

I agree.

I only hope that Apple takes a look at how Android informs the user about permission and implements it in iOS.

[Maggie Leung]

Originally Posted by paulckennedy

I agree.

I only hope that Apple takes a look at how Android informs the user about permission and implements it in iOS.

Yup. Me, too. When I read about people getting hacked or otherwise screwed online, it never makes me feel good, because all of us are vulnerable to some degree. Best we can hope is that companies learn from attacks, even if they don't happen to them. Bad thing is, they're secretive, so it limits learning potential. Of course, they have some good reasons for being secretive, but I figure some of it is just trying to spin coverage.

[scottjl]

Originally Posted by paulckennedy

I agree.

I only hope that Apple takes a look at how Android informs the user about permission and implements it in iOS.

apple already has such policies. applications that want to go through your address book, for example, must present a dialog box asking for permission first. if approved they then go through apple specific API's for access which limit what data they can pull out (can't pull out the note field for example). apple then has to approve the app to allow it into their store.

can an app try and scan your address book without asking you first? it can try. but if caught it will be rejected from apple's approval. trying to sneak past once might be an "innocent mistake" (unlikely since developers need to read apple's programming guidelines) but more than that is likely to get you booted from the development program. the last thing apple wants is to be caught selling rogue apps in their store. not only will it be a liability problem but a PR nightmare and incredible ammo for the competition.

[=X=]

Your incorrect on both accounts here

Originally Posted by scottjl

actually, given their upcoming licensing copy protection scheme, they can. also, i've read that AT&T wants to lock down android apps to only their one official store for the phones they sell. microsoft is the only place to get windows mobile 7 apps. game over.

1) Apple is preventing side loading of applications. They still allow you to download from the Google store (NOTE: ATT does not have a Google Market).

And yes there are apps that allow one to sideload w/o having to root/jailbreak your device, but don't consider this an option.

Originally Posted by scottjl

forgot to mention motorola locking you down on the droid x with self-destruction firmware!

This is also incorrect. The bootloader detects if the ROM installed is different from an official release if so it will fail to boot until the original ROM is reloaded. You can still root/jailbreak the device.

On both accounts I think this is wrong they should not lock out device in any way. Their argument is valid, though I disagree with it. Sidloading apps and installing kernels increase the chance of destabilizing the device and they are trying to reduce the number of client calls.

However your missing one major point. I still have choices, these are a few vendors, and I'm choosing to go with Verizon and Samsung because they are not so restrictive. What are you choices with Apple(AT&T and a black iphone).

Originally Posted by scottjl

is android more open than apple's offerings? right now it is. but i doubt that will continue in the long term. it's only going to take a few more apps like the one noted in the article to scare customers off and force companies to start locking things down fast. no one is going to want to sell a phone that hands over your identity to a thief. not when it launches class-action lawsuits against the carrier, the manufacturer and google.

Funny Google just opened their API even more.

[kovidgoyal]

Talk about a storm in a teacup. Y'all do realize that there is a lot more personal/important information stored on your computers and that applications that run on your computers are not "approved" by anybody.

[Maggie Leung]

Originally Posted by kovidgoyal

Talk about a storm in a teacup. Y'all do realize that there is a lot more personal/important information stored on your computers and that applications that run on your computers are not "approved" by anybody.

I figure whoever made the software is doing the "approving" and I am extending trust to that company. I could get burned, of course. With Calibre, I waited till I heard a lot of good feedback. You could be messing with my computer, for all I know.

[scottjl]

Originally Posted by =X=

Your incorrect on both accounts here


1) Apple is preventing side loading of applications. They still allow you to download from the Google store (NOTE: ATT does not have a Google Market).

And yes there are apps that allow one to sideload w/o having to root/jailbreak your device, but don't consider this an option.

well. if i jailbreak i can sideload apps. so it's a wash. you don't think the other carriers will follow in AT&T's footsteps if AT&T is successful at it?

This is also incorrect. The bootloader detects if the ROM installed is different from an official release if so it will fail to boot until the original ROM is reloaded. You can still root/jailbreak the device.

there were mentions made of the X going into a completely restricted mode that required motorola equipment to "unbrick". in any case, building any sort of self-destruction is not very consumer friendly. as for root/jailbreak, expect motorola to close the holes as they are found as well.

However your missing one major point. I still have choices, these are a few vendors, and I'm choosing to go with Verizon and Samsung because they are not so restrictive. What are you choices with Apple(AT&T and a black iphone).

you have a choice with the iphone. don't buy one. that is always an option. if the increasing number of rumors are true the iphone will be coming to other carries in the US as well. and now, if you're willing to go over the border and spend some money, you can buy a completely unlocked iphone in canada. i expect you'll be able to in the US as well as soon as AT&T's exclusive period is over.

Funny Google just opened their API even more.

well, so did apple with iOS 4, some 1,500 new APIs. doesn't mean they are more "open", just allowing more access via restricted methods.

[=X=]

Originally Posted by Maggie Leung

Thanks, that makes sense. I would prefer a sort of AT&T approach. I realize many buyers wouldn't. Android is too uncontrolled for a tech bonehead like me.

No you wouldn't trust me .

Actually most phones today are setup to only allow downloading from the Google Market. You have to disable this block in your phone before you can sideload your apps. What AT&T has done is prevented users from disabling this feature.
In your case since you are a technical challenged (as you put it, I would never call anybody that) you would not know how to disable this feature, until you have a need.


=X=