Meh, its just an example of the 'if we asked the user for permission, then its not our fault if it goes wrong' mentality that's I considered Windows UAC to be the king of.
The Android open store thing worries me, if a company is selling something in their store they have a responsibility to ensure it doesn't kill me/is fit for purpose. The ACCC (in Australia) is 100% certain on that fact, so as far as I'm concerned the theory should be, if Google (or Apple) sells it, it's safe. And they should factor the cost of ensuring that into their app store pricing. On Jun 29, 9:18 am, Moandji Ezana <mwa...@gmail.com> wrote: > Since I wrote the email below, I've heard two other people complain about > exactly this (Gina Trapani on This Week In Google and someone else I can't > remember). > > An example I have in front of me: the Kindle app requires permission to > "read phone state and identity", which is under the "Phone calls" category. > What does that mean? Why does Amazon need that kind of info? Maybe it's for > in-app purchases, but I have no idea. I trust Amazon not to do anything bad, > but it's weird to present this information without making it really > understandable to the user. > > Moandji > > > > On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 1:13 PM, Moandji Ezana <mwa...@gmail.com> wrote: > > What I find most problematic with the Android permissions system is that > > there's no explanation as to *why* an app needs certain permissions. > > Sometimes it's obvious, often it's not. Especially for sensitive data, it'd > > be nice to know "Needs access to contacts to share updates with them", for > > example. Otherwise, it's just a long list of stuff that makes little sense. > > > Moandji -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to javapo...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
