Richmond wrote:
> Microsoft Windows is flaky round the edges; hence viruses. Apple is
> bound round with steel; hence next to no viruses, and extremely
> difficult to "talk to" from anywhere else.
In all fairness to both sides there, the deep kernel revisions in recent
Windows versions have greatly improved security there. The UI is
another story, but I find Nadella interesting and so for now it's hard
to tell where it'll go but seems likely to be radically improved over
the next year or two.
And as for Apple, there's a reason Ahrendts is apparently being groomed
as Schiller's replacement: Schiller seems to have run out of positive
things to say about Apple's platforms in recent years, focusing instead
on perceived security risks with competing OSes. But as this brief
sampling of news findable in this morning's Google News, no OS is ever
without risk and it can be dangerously counterproductive to mislead
one's users into believing they don't need to be mindful of security:
http://money.cnn.com/2015/04/22/technology/mac-security-flaw/
http://bgr.com/2015/04/22/os-x-yosemite-rootpipe-security-vulnerability/
http://www.zdnet.com/article/apple-os-x-security-features-easily-bypassed-says-researcher/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/04/22/apple_no_ios_zone_bug/
It may be safe to say iOS has fewer *potential* exposures than Android,
but that number is far from zero and despite the number of *attempts*
that keep getting headlines the actual number of affected Android
devices is very small and almost exclusively limited to users who alter
the default protections provided by the system to download apps from
strange unknown sources - the same sorts of things that tend to affect
iOS users, often requiring jailbreaking.
With its seven layers of security that extend back to 2.3, Android as
ships is not much more dangerous than iOS, and far more secure than any
Mac, but if you're trying to pay the bills at a news site you're less
likely to garner ad impressions with "Billions of People Used Their
Phones Without Incident Today" than "OMG the Sky is Falling!", so the
press tends to focus on attempts alone and generally completely
overlooks the small number of devices actually affected. We do, after
all, sometimes see disproportionate press for iOS security exposures as
well, and only when you read down into the details of the article do you
find that, like most Android exploits, you need to alter something in
the OS to become vulnerable.
With a 75/25% market share split between Android and iOS it's accurate
to say there are fewer compromised iOS devices, but not zero. Just ask
any celebrity trying to keep their pics private. :)
> Of course . . . one could develop LiveCode standalones for iOS to be
> loaded through Cydia on Jail-broken iPhones and iPads, and
> one wouldn't have to "share one's spit" with Apple . . . but I guess
> that that is just too wild for most would-be iOS developers: don't
> know why.
Most developers go where the audience is. Both Android and iOS are much
safer to use when not jailbroken, so most folks leave 'em alone and
enjoy a reasonably safe experience.
--
Richard Gaskin
Fourth World Systems
Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
____________________________________________________________________
ambassa...@fourthworld.com http://www.FourthWorld.com
_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
