walled garden not so bad after all..

[kovidgoyal]

If you don't want to concede the point, don't post, but try to deflect attention from the point and I will call you on it.

[Maggie Leung]

Originally Posted by kovidgoyal

The point is: there is no security risk to using android greater than the security rusk in using any computer. Since no one is raising a hue and cry about the ability to install "unapproved" applications on a computer, it is silly at best and disingenuous at worst to do so for Android devices.

Unless you are arguing that Apple should be able to control everything that is installed on your computer as well, in which case you need to be locked up for your own safety.

Can't speak for others, but I try to stick with software from companies like Microsoft on my computers. I'm not saying there aren't security risks, but I try to go with companies that I recognize and that have some brand value behind them. I don't think, for instance, that Microsoft is going to try to hack into my bank account.

I'm considering a Dell Streak, but I'm wary of ending up with some app by a scammer, for instance. Even with apps in iTunes, I have no idea who the developers are. I'm hoping Apple's screening helps protect me, but no guarantee. I figure Apple's at least got a vested interest in keeping bad apps away from customers.

[scottjl]

there is no point to concede. you have no idea what information is on someone's computer, cell phone or stone tablet. nor do you have any idea on the value of that information. i could store information worth millions on a post-it note just as easily as in my ipad.

the way things stand now, the android landscape is not as secure as apple's walled garden. if you like the protection apple provides, then you use their approved apps. if you want "freedom" then you take the risks that go with that freedom. the sad thing is that 9 out of 10 people have no idea how to protect themselves from malicious apps like the one that data mined android phones. heck. most people don't know how to use virus protection on their desktops, and you expect them to protect their phones?

if you don't mind handing over every contact on your phone, along with all other personal data, then that's your right, but there are others who place just as high a value on the data on their phone as they do their desktop, or more. again, it's not for you to tell me what my data is worth.

if you have to resort to personal attacks to try and prove your argument then you've already lost.

please, go back to development, you're much better at programming.

[kovidgoyal]

Classic fearmongering. People are stupid, people can't protect themselves, therefore people must allow the nanny state/company to protect them instead.

[scottjl]

i dunno..

The app has been downloaded anywhere from 1.1 million to 4.6 million times.

i'd say there's quite a few who couldn't protect themselves from that app.

[kovidgoyal]

And in your opinion the answer is to restrict their freedom?

[scottjl]

freedom to do what?

[kovidgoyal]

To install software without having it approved by their nannies first.

[scottjl]

i'm sorry, is that "freedom" guaranteed some place? i missed that passage in the constitution. feel free to point it out to me.

fact is plain and simple. you want to use an iphone, you agree to play by apple's rules. that means buying authorized apps only. jailbreaking is breaking your license agreement that you accepted when you bought their product. if you don't like the agreement you are free not to buy apple's product and go buy someone else's.

if you can't find a product with an agreement that you like, you are free to build your own.

there are your freedoms. you might want to start reading your EULA's. you'll find you have very little "freedoms".

PS. apple's license agreement for the iphone can be found here.

[kovidgoyal]

Again with the misdirection. Where in my post do I claim that freedom is guaranteed. Quite the contrary freedom is anything but guaranteed, which is why we have to fight to maintain it.

As for the particular issue at stake here: You are trying to insinuate that using a walled software ecosystem is a good idea because it offers higher security. I agree, it does offer higher security.

But, in my opinion that security is not a sufficient reason to lock yourself up and give the keys to your nanny. If you are concerned about your security, do what Maggie a few posts before said she does, install software from sources you trust. Heck if this becomes a big enough problem, Google can start certifying apps in the Marketplace and if you're worried about security, install only the certified apps.

The answer is not to lock people up, it's to teach them to look out for themselves.

[scottjl]

not all people are like maggie, not all people are like you, not all people are like me.

there is no misdirection. you claim someone's freedom is restricted. to have that freedom restricted they have to possess that freedom to begin with. i simply am pointing out that you never had that freedom (at least not with apple) from the start. a person purchasing an iphone accepts they have no such freedom when they accept the EULA's terms and conditions. plain and simple.

someone can't take away freedoms that you never had.

as for educating the masses, please, look around you at the masses.. you get out there and educate them. i'm going to sleep..

[kovidgoyal]

A freedom is not something someone gives you. For someone from the Tha Land of The Free, you have a most anemic view of freedom. By all means sleep, fortunately, not all of us are asleep.

[Bremen Cole]

KovidGoyal said "People are stupid, people can't protect themselves, therefore people must allow the nanny state/company to protect them instead. " and "For someone from the Tha Land of The Free, you have a most anemic view of freedom."



In a free market (thank God, at least for now, we still have one) the success of a product is measure by how many people buy it. That is how people show what they want. That is the FREEDOM we have. If I want to buy a Xbox, and therefore only play games that are approved by Microsoft, it is my freedom to do so. If I want to game on a PC, where anything goes.... it is my freedom to do so. If I want an iPad, where I am "limited" to 250,000 apps that are approved by the manufacture (in this case Apple), it is my freedom to do so. If I want a Kindle, that is designed for a non-standard eBook format, and designed to be used with the manufactures store, it is my freedom to do so..... If I want to buy a truck to haul hay in, I can. But, if I want to buy and economy car to commute in , I can as well. I could go on and on..... I am free to buy the product that best fits my wants and needs...

You see, many people like their Xbox’s and PS3’s more than a gaming PC. They choose the “limited” software of these products, because they like the experience better than PC (open source) gaming. Many folks like their Kindle’s, and don’t even think about how “limiting” they are. For them the Kindle is the best solution. Likewise, many people like their mobile devices to be easy to use, and have a user friendly interface. They like the ease of getting applications and installing them. They like, in other words, the user experience better. Some of those people buy and enjoy their iPads. These people are not “stupid”, they are just people that are different than you.

I would hope that other people buy what they want.... and that their buying decisions are respected by others who buy differing products. I do not need a "nanny state" limiting my choices of products. American (and other) solders died to protect our land of the free. They died to protect our individual rights, including the right to own the private property of our choice. They did not die for the "freedom" of every product being "open source" and therefore fitting the needs of only a select group.....

I am not stupid. I simply buy the product that fits my needs best....

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by scottjl

jeeze. who the hell stirred up your hornets nets? i don't recall inviting you to this conversation,..

No invite needed. You continue to think you are in charge, but this is a public forum.

The image you post is clearly self-referential. Seeing that this entire thread is trolling.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by kovidgoyal

Again with the misdirection. Where in my post do I claim that freedom is guaranteed. Quite the contrary freedom is anything but guaranteed, which is why we have to fight to maintain it.

As for the particular issue at stake here: You are trying to insinuate that using a walled software ecosystem is a good idea because it offers higher security. I agree, it does offer higher security.

But, in my opinion that security is not a sufficient reason to lock yourself up and give the keys to your nanny. If you are concerned about your security, do what Maggie a few posts before said she does, install software from sources you trust. Heck if this becomes a big enough problem, Google can start certifying apps in the Marketplace and if you're worried about security, install only the certified apps.

The answer is not to lock people up, it's to teach them to look out for themselves.

Well said!