Posted on 05/10/2012 9:29:59 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Steve Jobs directly answered the questions about Flash in one of his many interviews. In short, the overwhelming source of many malware infections and OS instability issues were directly tied back to Adobe Flash. Apple tried working with Adobe for over a decade to resolve these issues, and Adobe refused to cooperate.
In fact, the latest round of malware to affect the Mac OS are based on 3rd party exploits (Java being the latest).
Because Jobs realized that the iPhone would be used for very critical personal information (banking, booking airfare, hotels, email, texts) he decided that the iOS would be “Closed” and applications written for iOS would be “sandboxed”. Because HTML5 basically makes Adobe Flash obsolete, it made no sense to include Flash into iOS.
Adobe acknowledged this recently, and HTML5 is flourishing; largely driven by Apple’s refusal to utilize Flash.
Another key component that needs to be appreciated is the concept of Hardware Codec vs. Software Codecs. The iPad/iPhone/iPod natively does H.264 and .mp4 video - ONLY. Why? Because there is a portion of the A4/A5/A5+ chip that has a hardware video codec that can ONLY understand these video formats. Like a Blender in your kitchen, this section of the chip does one thing and one thing only. It can never - ever - do anything else. The plus is that it sips very little power to play your video or YouTube clip.
Software Codecs (as loaded on your laptop/desktop) can play virtually any format of video codec - and in doing so, consume tons of power in comparison. You see, as the video file is manipulated through the various combinatons of codecs - there are gazillions of memory read/write operations to perform this task. Each of these operations consumes some bit of power.
So, if the iPad supported Flash - not only would it be vulnerable to the hordes of malware exploits inherit in Flash, the battery life for playing videos would likely drop from 10 hours down to 2 hours.
I see and understand about that, but shouldn’t it be my choice if I wish to run an application regardless of how much risk there is in doing so?
So, while I like Apple products I don’t appreciate the fact they close their OS to my wanting to do something they feel is a threat.
I don’t like Gates thinking he’s my daddy anymore than Jobs (RIP) did or Apple does.
It’s why I’m rooting my phone to rid it of the Verizon apps they put on there with no way to remove.
I Pay for it, I decide what I want to use and if they make it impossible for me to use it as I see fit then I will buy from someone who is not so restrictive.
By all means, Jailbreak your phone and knock yourself out. The iOS 5.1 Jailbreak is almost ready for release. Personally, I'm a big fan of My-Wi.
However, it would be highly stupid and careless for Apple to release a product that they know is full of security holes, wouldn't it? No one wants their banking information stolen, to have some hacker in some foreign country purchasing airline tickets on their bank accounts.
As for removing the Verizon Apps - go for it. Frankly, I'm surprised Verizon did that noise. You should be able to remove them via iTunes or the iPhone Configuration Tutility Seriously? My wife has Verizon on her iPhone 4s and she doesn't have a mess of Verizon apps. It's pretty much a clean install.
iOS is designed to be as bullet-proof as they know how to make it, while continuously adding features and supporting legacy products - and while keeping everything fairly responsive. This is no small task. However, I think everyone appreciates a secure phone. There are a plethora of malware that are out and about in the Android market - and at this point (after 4+ years) ZERO in the iPhone environment.
The Mtro interface is HORRIBLE!!!
Heck the last 4 interfaces have been crap.
When i get a PC the first thing I do it set the UI back to “Windows Classic” it runs faster as all that aero crap is not running!
User unfriendly. Had to search around too much to get to what I needed, IMHO.
“Yeah, I’m familiar with the case. Prosecuted and tried by a bunch of socialist pr!cks with the vigorous approval of the ninety-nine percent.”
‘Socialist pr!cks’? I don’t think so- it was Netscape pushing for the prosecution of Microsoft, and Robert Bork was representing Netscape. The argument was that Microsoft abuses their market power in operating systems to unlawfully keep rival applications from the marketplace.
After selling Netscape Navigator to AOL the Netscape crew became Mozilla and built the Firefox browser.
>> ‘Socialist pr!cks’? I don’t think so
What would YOU call David Boies, then? A conservative stalwart?
A related catchphrase from that time:
“DOS isn’t done until Lotus won’t run.”
I have been running Windows 8 since the moment it was released and I have always used Firefox and Thunderbird with absolutely no problem.
I do notice that Windows 8 is faster and more intuitive.
Have you tried the TABLET version of Windows 8?
Mozilla claims that Firefox is being banned from certain versions of Windows 8, the forthcoming tablet-centric OS from Microsoft.
No, I haven’t tried the tablet version. I am happy using my tablet with all the factory installed Google stuff.
Why try to make this about Boies? He didn’t initiate the antitrust action, he was responding to the complaint coming from Netscape. Netscape and Bork hardly qualify as ‘socialists’, and Netscape’s case had merit.
Microsoft was using their position as the OS creator to hobble Netscape’s browser. Microsoft had no intention of competing solely on the quality of Internet Explorer versus Netscape Navigator, and they were denying consumers the ability to choose a competing product. If Microsoft had succeeded we would all be stuck with IE.
(Anybody have a calendar for 2063?)
Of course. I use Linux. It is built right in.
$ cal 2063
2063
January February March
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 1 2 3
7 8 9 10 11 12 13 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
14 15 16 17 18 19 20 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
21 22 23 24 25 26 27 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
28 29 30 31 25 26 27 28 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
April May June
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 1 2
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
15 16 17 18 19 20 21 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
22 23 24 25 26 27 28 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
29 30 27 28 29 30 31 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
July August September
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 1
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
15 16 17 18 19 20 21 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
22 23 24 25 26 27 28 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
29 30 31 26 27 28 29 30 31 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30
October November December
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 1
7 8 9 10 11 12 13 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
14 15 16 17 18 19 20 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
21 22 23 24 25 26 27 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
28 29 30 31 25 26 27 28 29 30 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31
I think that in this context, it's worthwhile to remid everyone of exactly what microsoft did, once they destroyed netscape. Does everyone recall how long microsoft skated along on IE5? Every browser in the world had tabs and many other features for years before microsoft ever bothered to do any enhancements to IE.
I think the biggest problem here is that mocrosoft has a history of abusing their dominant market position to destroy competition, then completely ignore the needs of their customers.
I had not heard that one, but seeing what Microsoft did to sabotage other software I would not doubt it.
I can’t believe Microsoft was not sued out of existance for doing stuff like that
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.