...

View Full Version : Running a country?



drhowarddrfine
04-20-2010, 01:46 PM
There's an app for that. (http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/ptech/04/16/volcano.ash.norway.ipad/index.html?hpt=Sbin)

When Norway's prime minister found himself stuck in New York as a volcanic cloud grounded flights to Europe, he fired up his new Apple iPad and did the job remotely.
In what could be a first for the new gadget, Jens Stoltenberg told CNN he used the iPad to manage the situation at home as Norway closed its airspace under threat from the ash.

VIPStephan
04-20-2010, 03:30 PM
Ah, so, we all need iPads to do things remotely, is that what you are saying?
Slowly the hype around this device is really annoying me.

Oh and I like some of the comments on that article. At least there are other people that don’t fall for the hype, too.

oracleguy
04-20-2010, 04:06 PM
Ah, so, we all need iPads to do things remotely, is that what you are saying?
Slowly the hype around this device is really annoying me.

Oh and I like some of the comments on that article. At least there are other people that don’t fall for the hype, too.

I know what you mean, it does get tiring. The range of Apple's reality distortion field (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality_distortion_field) around the iPad is astonishing.

The iPad is cool and all but using it to read and write email hardly seems like a newsworthy event. "Tonight at 11, Norway's Prime Minister reads an ebook on a iPad to pass the time on his flight to Spain." :rolleyes:

Fumigator
04-20-2010, 06:38 PM
The fanbots are really cracking me up, which almost makes up for the annoyingness of the buzz around this gadget-which-can't-replace-any-other-gadget. They are zealots! My father-in-law it leading the regional Apple fanbot chapter.

drhowarddrfine
04-20-2010, 06:57 PM
Gee. Going by the title and link, I'd thought you guys would find it humorous which is why I posted it.

Despite what some may say about "hype", I found the iPad to be somewhat remarkable as I said in the other thread. It will be the first Apple computing device we will ever own, not counting various versions of the iPod.

VIPStephan
04-20-2010, 11:07 PM
It will be the first Apple computing device we will ever own, not counting various versions of the iPod.

But thatís the point: The iPad is nothing more than a somewhat bigger mixture of iPod and iPhone with a few more features. For me itís a gimmick, not a computing device. And since the iPod hit the market big time Apple isnít just something for fanboys anymore but for the (stupid and ignorant) masses. If everybody owns an Apple device whatís so special about it then? I see this in my circle of acquaintances where people that didnít even know that Apple existed until two years ago suddenly start to buy any device from Apple because they started with an iPod or an iPhone and it integrates so well with each other (or shall I say it excludes anything non-Apple as much as possible?) so they just have to have a MacBook and an iPad, too, nevermind the use of all that.

Apple used to be for fanboys when it was expenisve, exclusive, and innovative. Now itís just expensive but yet, more and more people can afford to obtain one of the numerous little gimmicks they sell for a relatively reasonable price (compared to a monthly salary in industrialized countries) which doesnít differ in any way from Microsoftís practices back in the days.

I guess itís the loss of exclusivity that makes me angry. And I fear that the attention Apple draws also draws numerous suspicious people that start to program visruses and what not. I hoped that weíre going to be saved from that.
Iím gonna refrain from commenting any more on such issues.

drhowarddrfine
04-21-2010, 01:17 AM
The iPad is nothing more than a somewhat bigger mixture of iPod and iPhone with a few more features.As I said in other threads, people who have one disagree but actually say a better comparison is the Touch is just a small iPad because the Touch had to be restricted, in ways, due to its smaller screen.


For me itís a gimmick, not a computing device.Hm. Yet others are saying it's just like a notebook.
I see this in my circle of acquaintances where people that didnít even know that Apple existedMy son has built his own systems since he was 15. Never had an interest in Macs till this came out. He, too, thought it was just a big iPhone (he has a Touch). Was not interested till he went to the Apple store two weeks ago. Played with it for 15 minutes and was hooked. Not the coolness factor. The usability I mentioned before. My son's not into cool.


Apple used to be for fanboys when it was expenisve, exclusive, and innovative. Now itís just expensiveNow that's a stupid statement. Like I've said elsewhere, we used Macs exclusively at SGI, Pixar and another company I worked for strictly for business. We had thousands of those things for one big reason: connectivity. We could plug one in anywhere in the world and it worked across networks without effort. All the world's publishing/film/graphic industry are not "fanboys". Now we're getting OT, though, but is your statement coming from a Microsoft fanboy*? Why are you also dissing Apple for making affordable products? Without hardware, isn't Microsoft's Windows OS $300 complete? Shouldn't we go off on MS for high priced software being sold to the stupid mass market fanboys while Apple gives a complete system for only $200 more? Shouldn't we be dissing Microsoft for kicking Linux off that cheap notebook computer in Africa? Now we're really getting OT.


I guess itís the loss of exclusivity that makes me angry. And I fear that the attention Apple draws also draws numerous suspicious people that start to program visruses and what not. I hoped that weíre going to be saved from that.

*Now that makes me wonder if you're an Apple supporter? I don't recall from your previous posts where you stand on that.

I don't know what OS iPads and such run on but Apple OSes are not Windows and anyone who thinks programming viruses for Apple products is just same song different verse doesn't know what they're talking about.

oracleguy
04-21-2010, 02:43 AM
Gee. Going by the title and link, I'd thought you guys would find it humorous which is why I posted it.

No you're right it is funny, mostly the laughs are at CNN's expense.


I don't know what OS iPads and such run on but Apple OSes are not Windows and anyone who thinks programming viruses for Apple products is just same song different verse doesn't know what they're talking about.

Yes they are very different platforms but that isn't relevant to the point VIPStephan was trying make. The more popular a software product is, the more likely people will bother to spend times to find security exploits. No platform has no security exploits and that includes Apple's iPhone OS. There was that worm last year (granted that was first seen on jailbroken iPhones) and then the flaw with how they were handling digital certificates earlier this year that would reroute your web traffic and allow for malicious files to be loaded.

He was just saying (I think) that the relative level of security through obscurity that Apple provided was a benefit, one that they could start to lose.

With iPads and iPhones and such becoming more popular more people will take the time to try and exploit it. More so if the devices are associated with yuppies.

brad211987
04-21-2010, 04:27 AM
He was just saying (I think) that the relative level of security through obscurity that Apple provided was a benefit, one that they could start to lose.

You nailed it. As Apple products gain market share, a real picture of their security can be established. The security through obscurity is always nothing more than a false sense of security, and it will be interesting over the next few years to see what kind of malware shows up for apple products, and android products while we're at it.

What I worry about is that Apple advertises that you "don't need to worry" about viruses and malware on their products. This is going to bite them hard, but hopefully only temporarily when the hackers start to take aim at them. This isn't to say that they are more/less secure than windows or linux, but they are going to have a rough road ahead. Right now you have a quickly increasing market of unsecured devices (with respect to malware detection) and that should scare anyone.

VIPStephan
04-21-2010, 04:33 AM
Yeah, I kind of meant what oracleguy assumed that I meant. :p For the records: I do own a Mac and I admit that I like it, on one hand because it’s practical for cross-browser web development and another reason was that there have been almost no viruses for the Mac OS. Sure, it’s all beautiful, and handy, I don’t deny that. We can only thank Apple’s designers for their effort to make beautiful interface and interaction designs because many web designers have based their approach on Apple’s design principles which eventually contributed to better website design in general. But the more users there are that use a system the more ID10Ts there are that can cause things to be screwed up. That’s why there’s so much malware for Windows. That’s why IE has been a bigger security hole than Osama Bin Laden could be in the CIA headquarters. And Microsoft/Windows became such a pain in the butt because it enabled any luser (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luser) to own and operate a personal computer. And I see Apple more and more heading down the same path.

OK, one could argue that a closed system as on the iPad/iPhone isn’t as fault-prone as a freely usable system but as I said, people don’t stick just to these devices. They start to buy real computers because they think they’ve gotta have them and this is where they (as a mass market) start to devalue the original product. This is why that hype is more and more annoying me. And otherwise respectable media like CNN are jumping on the bandwagon doesn’t make things better.

That you in your companies and the media industry were/are working with Macs doesn’t necessarily mean that you/they are all fanboys. Of course there are people that actually use it for a good reason (and one reason used to be that Mac was more stable than Windows) and don’t need it solely as status symbol. But the Apple community used to be “the community” that was defined by outsiders as that because it consisted mostly of style-aware professional and home users that specifically decided to afford a Macintosh when they could have bought anything (and yes, there were these people that would have bought anything from Apple back in the days, too). Nowadays every fifth grader owns an iPhone just because their friends also own one, and thanks to its simplicity you don’t even have to be smart to use it. Great development, in my eyes. :rolleyes:

drhowarddrfine, now that you’ve ranted about Microsoft in every other post you made here let me rant about Apple for one time, OK?

Zethix
04-21-2010, 07:16 AM
This sort of thing is certainly a good ad for the iPad. Probably a bad ad for the relevancy of the news services, though.

Too much news and current affairs reporting these days, seems to consist of thinly disguised infomercials (at least for the commercial news and current affairs services).

Fumigator
04-21-2010, 05:51 PM
I've become so confused over what this argument is all about.

Is Apple evil or not?!?!? Someone tell me what I should believe. I am a sheep, I need a shepherd.

oracleguy
04-21-2010, 05:59 PM
I am a sheep, I need a shepherd.



That Guy: There are two kinds of people: sheep and sharks. Anyone who is a sheep is fired. Who is a sheep?
Dr. Zoidberg: Errr, excuse me... which is the one people like to hug?
That Guy: Gutsy question. You're a shark. Sharks are winners, and they don't look back because they have no necks. Necks are for sheep.


Sharks FTW.

sybil6
04-21-2010, 07:23 PM
so why it has always been less viruses on Macs? just because of a minor audience ?

found this interesting:

Macs are less prone to viruses because they are less prone to virues. ...I would state it a different way. Macs are less prone to viruses because Windows is more prone to viruses. Windows is more prone to viruses because Microsoft gives users the tools to write them. It also promotes a culture in which viruses can easily propagate. With the introduction of Visual Basic for Applications in Microsoft Office, the number of viruses exploded. Unlike Java and AppleScript, VBA had unrestricted access to the OS. It expanded the domain of virus writers from that of skilled assembly language programmers to any dweeb with text editor. By 1999, things had become so bad that Microsoft asserted its now famous excuse: Microsoft Windows has more viruses because it was more popular. Microsoft presented not a shred of evidence to support its assertion, but the popular press and a lot of weak-minded users accepted the excuse uncritically. I call it the Whore's Excuse--"I'm not a whore, I'm just popular."

anyway something like this could happen to Apple in the future as they want to become a more popular platform.

drhowarddrfine
04-21-2010, 08:03 PM
Popularity isn't the key feature. You can use the argument that there will be more virus problems as Macs become more used but that does not mean the vulnerabilities will increase. If it's easy to make a virus for Windows that does not mean it will be easy to write a virus for Mac or any other OS. The internals are not the same and the methods for doing things are not the same. OSX is Unix.

instaunt
04-21-2010, 11:43 PM
I'm surprised Apple haven't started paying celebrities to use an iPad in public ... oh, wait ... they have ...

Apple is so lame. Simpsons got it right. Just there to seem cool to young kids before gouging them (and their parents).

drhowarddrfine
04-22-2010, 02:35 AM
Apple is so lame. Simpsons got it right. Just there to seem cool to young kids before gouging them (and their parents).
You can only wish you were so cool.

brad211987
04-22-2010, 07:54 PM
so why it has always been less viruses on Macs? just because of a minor audience ?

found this interesting:


anyway something like this could happen to Apple in the future as they want to become a more popular platform.

Quite a few problems in that quote from my view:


Microsoft gives users the tools to write them.

As far as I know, most operating systems have a system of user access controls and support for at least some programming language. Many viruses are written in C, which is supported easily(sometimes more easily) on a linux/unix/mac system.


Unlike Java and AppleScript, VBA had unrestricted access to the OS.

This completely ignores the real problem. Vulnerabilities in Office and the like are not because of VBA itself being insecure, more so from Windows operating systems running everything with too many privileges to begin with. There is no reason to run a Word Processor as an administrator, the Unix world has known that for a long time. Java and AppleScript can be just as insecure if you run programs with root access.


All of Microsoft's security problems boil down to a few core issues:
1. Until about 2002, security was nothing but a marketing issue at Microsoft. They have been catching up ever since. I don't think you'll find anyone that claims that security has gotten worse in Microsoft products, but its just not up to par with its competition.
2. Related to #1, Until Vista(kind of) and Windows 7, users were Administrators running with admin privileges all the time unless explicitly set otherwise. This is crippling for security, anything that gets executed will inherit those permissions and have full access to the system. This is why VBA vulnerabilities can be so destructive.
3. The final nail in the coffin for me, and the largest reason in my mind to never use IE, is that Internet Explorer is too integrated into the operating system. Compromising IE meant compromising the entire system for quite a while. Simply by switching browsers you improve security dramatically. I think this has improved a bit with Windows 7 as well.


Overall, popularity makes Microsoft a more lucrative target. There is no question that is Apple had majority market share and was used heavily in server environments that it would be attacked much more frequently. The size of the target doesn't make it any more or less secure though. I'm more concerned with Apple marketing themselves as not being vulnerable to viruses.

drhowarddrfine
04-22-2010, 09:31 PM
The size of the target doesn't make it any more or less secure though.That's a point I've tried to make to so many people.
I'm more concerned with Apple marketing themselves as not being vulnerable to viruses.
I don't know Apple ever has but users surely do. As you touched on, the permissions and access points are entirely different in Unix (Mac OS is certified Unix) than they are on Windows and even if attempts to hack Unix increased, the difficulty is still there.

As an example of that, just last week, iirc, there was an article about a new Mac virus which allows someone to take control of the system. The writer was smart enough to acknowledge that, not only did a user have to be root to activate it, it would have to be manually installed to work.

Many people make issue of vulnerabilities listed for *nix/BSD without realizing that's the case with most of them. A couple years ago I read (esr's site?) the last actual dangerous virus or trojan that could attack *nix/BSD was in 2001 but it died on the vine as soon as a security update was configured.



EZ Archive Ads Plugin for vBulletin Copyright 2006 Computer Help Forum