Team-BHP (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/)

-   Gadgets, Computers & Software (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/gadgets-computers-software/)

-   -   Apple sues Samsung and now HTC (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/gadgets-computers-software/99886-apple-sues-samsung-now-htc-9.html)

Where have you been? :D HTC was among the first companies to be sued by Apple. So your point that HTC doesn't copy from Apple makes this even more funny. Apple is already suing HTC, inspite of them supposedly making phones that are different from Apple's.

TSK1979 you are right on the patent as well as security issue. Also it is irrelevant to this thread but what was being indicated by websites is that one university researcher was able to push an application through Google market disguised as extension to angry bird.
So vulnerability escaped through the Google App approval process and was delivered through marketplace

However this is a process flaw , Since security model is based on manifest and DAC one can argue it is platform flaw but that is same case with iOS and Symbian as well. In Linux it is quite possible to have additional LSM security as well which is not included in Android.

An additional point is that since now the App market can be accessed through web it is possible if your google account is compromised then an app can be installed.

Android Market now delivering malware, as well as updated Angry Birds? | ZDNet

Rooted Android devices are out of scope of this discussion but the cited potential vulnerabilities are in un-rooted ones.


However none of this proves that either Apple iOS or WP7 is any safer if attacked there may be same issues.
BB Playbook based on QNX has a slight edge as it follows MAC principles ( For which Linux LSM can be used in Android)

Don't make me laugh. Dual boot using virtualization? Makes me want to read your earlier posts again.
Yeh, for patent infringements, but not for making iPhone look-alikes.

Bit puzzled What is there to laugh ??

There are 2 kinds of Virtualization baremetal pure ( XEN . L4 Micro Kernel based) and Para Virtualization ( Virtualbox , QEMU , VMWare Server/workstation) normally what Mainframe or PC user see as virtualization is para-virtualization but on embedded device it is different case.

A phone is not a PC with a HDD with boot-sector where POST brings up the device and you can present a grub list for multiple OS it has to use a bare-metal virtualization for initial bring up of the devices.

So on a HTC HD2 when you install a second OS on SD card it is required that the SD card controller is up and running and also there should be a bare minimal file system so that OS image from SD card can be read.
Apart from brining up minimal devices you need a loader to load the image since this has to happen before OS image on SD card is booted a small initial system is needed to bring up the minimal system .
And all these needs when clubbed together make what can be called a microkernel OS and that is an example of virtualization whatever brand /market name you give to it.

Check this link Motorola Evoke EA4 used this solution for a different use-case where both modem and AP are on same chip.

OKL4 Microvisor : Open Kernel Labs

Last year my team did an in-house prototype booting 2 Linux OS on a single mobile using open-source L4 Micro-kernel ( not OKL4) , required lots of work in tool-chains and drivers and then this was canned after few demos like 80% of R&D work in any company.

Don't you know - the features you are describing can not exist, Apple-the-innovator hasn't done it or told anybody about it yet :D

:uncontrol

This thread is hilarious. It is one thing to like a product that you paid for and love, but it is ridiculous to dogmatically worship a company to this extent.
It is also alarming that so many people have no clue what can be patented. Hell! My cheap Nokia in 2005 had a grid layout! I don't even have a retort for the sheer stupidity in the "he stole my icon" claim. What next? Forums suing each other over emoticons?

At the Android being insecure point: If a user is a dumbass - I don't see how it is Google's fault. Besides, I'd much rather have an infected phone, than be told by Papa Jobs what I can install and what I can't. It's like buying a Car, and being told "hey, you are not allowed to drive it on so and so roads".

Off Topic: I hate the iPod-ization of our future generations. A lot of us learnt so much about computers, different OSs, kernels, drivers, window managers etc because we could tinker with our systems. The current approach, i fear, might completely kill every way to do that (and Android is not the solution here, but a part of the problem). We really need manufacturers who would sell hardware only, and allow the user to install whatever they like.

P.S. Thanks to the guy who posted the graphene article.

Some blasphemous punk you are :Shockked: saying bad things about the biggest innovator of the last two generations !


And by the way, a configurable hardware on which you can install any software of your liking is something Apple will invent and patent in a few years - don't use a time machine to steal their ideas. :D

I think you are jumping the gun here! An average user need not have a degree from Caltech to use as complicated a thing as a smartphone! To say that if user is dumbass how is it googles fault is really too much! Google needs to make software for "aam junta" and not just for techies. And our "aam junta" has every right to use a smart phone the way they like to use it (even if it means underutilization). Hell not more than 1% of the population on earth would understand most of the things u r talking about (OSs, kernels, drivers, ... what the heck!). Why should I bother myself with what is underneath. What, as an average user with some bucks, I need is a great experience with the device! Whether google gives it or Apple I dont care two cents.

Anyway the discussion is about innovation so lets not digress. My view is user experience is not about innovation in this context. So Apple are just shooting themselves in the foot. Theres nothing innovative about candybar shape or the shape/layout of icons!

(1) You'd be surprised at the percentage of the market which is tech savvy.
(2) You're putting words in my mouth. I never said that one becomes a "dumbass" if he doesn't know what the kernel does. However, if one does not understand the risks of installing 3rd party apps - then he IS either a dumbass, or too lazy/proud to read up a bit on the internet.
(3) I did add the "Off Topic" qualifier, so you needn't point it out.

And it isn't too much to say "it isn't google's fault". Android gives one the freedom (not as much as I would like, and the OEMs cripple the user further) to go and install whatever he/she likes. The choice is left to the user. If the user decides to install sexy_hentai_keyboard22, which has a 1 star rating, how is it google's fault?

I think people will understand a car analogy.
Now lets say a manufacturer A says, that most expressways in India have a speed limit of 90kmph, so they limit their car to 90kmph electronically.
Mfr B does not limit the car to 90kmph.

So does it mean if somebody drives car from B over 90kmph and crashes, its the manufacturers fault, since the user is not expected to know that driving at 150kmph can be dangerous on highways?

tsk, your analogy makes the point, but doesn't capture what Apple actually does. A more apt analog would be (in addition to what you wrote):

"mfr A tells the customer that driving on only certain pre-approved roads is allowed, if someone makes a new road - that new road has to be to mfr A's specifications and then will be approved by A and of course A will charge for that. Also mfr. A tells you that at any point of time A can change the engine/seat height/lighting/spring stiffness of the car because A knows the best about how to provide you a complete car-experience. And if you dare to do any modifications to the car, then A can remotely immobilize the engine and convert the car into an expensive paperweight for your pet genie"

I don't even want to go into mfr. B, would you even buy such a car?

I doubt this car analogy works. For the simple fact that when you cross 90kmph, you have the car's speedometer to tell you that. When you install an app from a forum, I doubt the author of the app will mark it as malware.
Suppose there is an app that performs function X. When you get it from iTunes store, you know it is not going to harm your phone. But for android, someone else can write malicious software, advertise it as performing function X and succeed in causing some inconvenience to you. Of course, its not the phone's fault.

But look at another case. IE is subjected to more attacks than any other browser, mainly because you hit more people that way. But still its IE that gets blamed for poor security.


Isn't something similar already being done by car manufacturers when they recall cars to make changes to it to fix some defects?

I think these car analogies are best left out of this discussion.

Let me put your point together with tsk's analogy:

some guys buy the car from A drive it no faster than 90 (after all they can't) and are happy to do 80 - and they are by and large safe.

many more buy from B. Some of them do 130 on the road, a few of them crash the vehicle, so third party guy come up with anti-crash systems (read anti-virus).


Next month you see ads : A user (saying proudly) "my car is safe I don't need anti-crash devices"

Hmmm. If, in this hypothetical scenario, crashes can happen only when you cross 90kmph, then what user A is claiming is not factually incorrect, right?

EDIT: OT: The "you've been quoted" feature is working for me now! Hurray!

:) no of course not - and if a user of B comes on the TV and says users of A are idiots who pay more for less functionality he would be factually correct too.