What is Digg?Sponsored by HowLifeWorks
How Private Online Shopping Clubs Work view!
howlifeworks.com - How to become a member and get discounts of up to 80% on must-have luxury goods
89 Comments
- digitaldivinci, on 08/06/2008, -1/+12I am sure people will get in a bind over this, but do you really think it will be a problem? When I was installing Jailbreak Apps, I was worried if anyone had other intentions than letting me check my Netflix queue or letting me play Tetris. If someone 'officially' tries this through the app store and it gets passed through some sort of deception, I am glad there is an emergency switch that Apple can throw.
- sidianmsjones, on 08/07/2008, -0/+4Apples ability to apparently apply apples to Apple store applications.
- ren1999, on 08/07/2008, -0/+3Actually, Apple, Microsoft, and every other criminally inclined software developer needs to stop phoning home to report what I have on my devices. And they certainly do not have a right to remotely deactivate my apps by directing my connection to a blacklist website. They do not own my devices -- I DO!
Though it has superior hardware, The IPod Touch is not a true Hand Writing device as Palm is. It takes 3rd Party Software to read books and view images properly. Apple has not provided this though the device cost over $400 U.S. dollars.
I tell you what, I will campaign actively against any hardware or software maker that goes against the wishes of its consumers. Nvidia and Creative should just wait and see what happens to it for rejecting and suppressing the development of Open Source drivers as well as degrading its Microsoft drivers on purpose.
The same goes for Apple. The IPod Touch is my first Apple device in a long while. It is best not to anger me with this 2.0 spy on, disable, and outright attack the customers "upgrade" software. - pyrates, on 08/06/2008, -0/+3Well now that this is known, it could modify that url it checks to something else that blacklists no apps or blacklists a non-malicious app like safari, that would be fun to do :)
- JasonQG, on 08/07/2008, -1/+4I guess this explains how iPint magically disappeared from my iPhone...
- twiny3, on 08/06/2008, -2/+4I kinda like the extra security there. It reminds me of the old NES days when a developer had to get Nintendo's certification to sell games.
- dizzy113, on 08/06/2008, -1/+3This article points out what I think is the biggest difference between apple and microsoft. Apple tries to protect its user by having control over every little, tiny, minute detail of its products. I wish apple would meet somewhere in the middle. Coming from a PC background it is frustrating sometimes to always have my hands tied by apple, but I understand they make products for the masses, not the 5% of tech savvy users. But if this article is true I think this is going a bit too far. I would like an alert or something telling me an app is bad, but not to uninstall it without my knowledge. Maybe even disable it and force me to re-enable to use it.
- richardhenry, on 08/07/2008, -1/+3What? People are actually even starting to ask questions about this? It's a great idea. Just because it's good for Apple's PR, doesn't mean it's bad for you? I mean what, you want to keep your malicious apps?!
**HEADLINE: First virus on the iPhone — 10th of August**
Apple recalled the application from all of their devices within two hours, and immediately removed it from the app store. They provided refunds to all the people that purchased it.
OR:
Millions affected by first iPhone virus. Emails lost. Calls dropped. Phones bricked. Kittens dead. - unrealmp3, on 08/07/2008, -0/+2I fear for NetShare..
- dizzy113, on 08/06/2008, -0/+1They already have to get approved before they even appear. I think apple should be more careful reviewing apps before they ever go out the door than try to "recall" them.
- inactive, on 08/07/2008, -0/+1Why do you think they're making it up?
Or was that just a knee-jerk fanboy defense of Apple? - Aitese, on 08/07/2008, -1/+2The man was saying he would be suprised if Symbian didn't have a similar system...I was just outlining the system Symbian has...smart ass.
- kr9681, on 08/07/2008, -0/+1whats wrong with boxoffice? i have it, and i was unaware that it was taken off the app store.
- richardhenry, on 08/08/2008, -0/+1Because they want to satisfy their customers and make money? They would have to refund you if the app was paid.
- AlienMushroom, on 08/07/2008, -0/+1Apple, the new MPAA.
- Virgule, on 08/07/2008, -0/+1I don't necessarily endorse open source softwares but really, how can we be SURE the software has no "undocumented features" without access to the source code?
Open Source must have a bright future! - ozziek, on 08/08/2008, -0/+1I bet you bought the $1000 app didn't you?
- JasonQG, on 08/07/2008, -0/+1Mine is gone, and other people have reported it vanished on its own. ::shrug::
- Apocalyptic0n3, on 08/07/2008, -0/+1I forgot about DRM but the XBLA cleanup didn't affect people who had already bought the game. This is taking a product away from users who have paid for it.
- inactive, on 08/07/2008, -0/+1True enough. I wouldn't put anything past MS.
I guess you could try ubuntu or one of those open source OS's if you're still worried. - ozziek, on 08/07/2008, -0/+1Microsoft fanboys don't need to do a thing, Apple are ***** iPhone 2.0 up all by themselves ;)
- gdgi, on 08/07/2008, -1/+2old NES days? what the ***** do you think happens with every-single modern console (or every console that has ever existed)? Every single game that is released for xbox 360, ps3, wii etc is offically cleared, vetted and approved by the console manufacturer. Just because a publisher or developer create a game for said console has little or nothing to do with whether the game will actually be approved for them.
It's called a 'walled garden' approach and it is a absolutely terrible, dictatorial mindset that sheople around the world need to protest and fight with everything that they can.
It's amazing that people can whine and bitch about things like net neutrality and then go home and play their xbox 360 etc - which is effectively promoting this kind of 'do what we say and nothing else' corporate approach to technology.
Corporations (particularly big media conglomerates) would LOVE it if everyone would just shut the ***** up and accept this kind of mindset - but somehow the world seems to let Apple off the hook time and time again for the kind of behavior that would put Microsoft in court (or worse).
I'd think it was high-*****-larious if it wasn't so pathetic. Apple suckers people into buying ***** and ideas that they don't believe in themselves. - Skywise, on 08/07/2008, -0/+1?? I still have it...
- DelMonte, on 08/09/2008, -0/+1If you release a malicious application that ends up on the blacklist, you'll obviously get blacklisted as a developer too and won't be able to publish another app under a different name, unless you pay another $99 and wait again until you're approved.
Anyway, a malware author would notice that Apple caught him even without this remote delete blacklist, as the app would be removed from the iTunes store and his developer license revoked. The blacklist doesn't change a single thing. Do you think Apple should keep malicious apps on the iTunes store just so that the author doesn't find that he's been caught and publish the app under another name? - zadadka, on 08/07/2008, -0/+1With Emperor Ming.
- inactive, on 08/07/2008, -0/+1@digiguy
You said: "Becuase every ***** day, somebody is bring out some ***** about the iPhone."
So? Its a newsworthy device. Get over it.
You said: "And exactly how do you know it's true???"
I never said it was.
You said: "And you really think with millions of phones Apple really going to do this??"
So you're saying that the more popular a platform is, the less likely it is that a company will try to invasively control it? So by your logic Windows software called WGA doesn't exist, nor does the BD+ Bluray DRM, nor indeed does Apples iTunes DRM.
You don't really understand whats being talked about here do you? You're a little out of your depth here kid. - gdgi, on 08/07/2008, -0/+0of course it's 'legal' - just like Microsoft deciding to 'phase out' unpopular xbox live arcade games, or DRM providers like yahoo or microsoft shutting down their DRM-based music services. Consumers that were suckered into paying money for this kind of crap are ***** out of luck.
the only reason anything ets done about it is if consumers complain loudly enough.
And technology/media companies wonder why people seek 'alternate' means of acquiring and using their products. - aperobot, on 08/07/2008, -0/+0This would be understandable if they were all malicious apps Apple was disabling, but as JasonQG points out above, iPint seems to have disappeared from my phone, without notice, as well. We're talking about a game here, one that requires no network connectivity, access to other iPhone apps, and has never crashed (as opposed to several apps that are still on my phone). My only guess would be that the app is so popular that they are toying with a paid version, or prepping some sort of age restriction for downloading it. iPint is now missing from the App Store as well...
- JasonQG, on 08/07/2008, -1/+1If Apple has the ability to remotely deactivate apps, what's to stop them from doing it for arbitrary reasons?
- aperobot, on 08/07/2008, -0/+0I wonder that, too. Any former NetShare owners out there who got a $10 kickback? I'd assume Apple would just give them a $10 iTunes credit at most... if that.
- Asrrin29, on 08/07/2008, -1/+1Windows Mobile gives you the freedom to install anything yo want on your phone. It also gives you the freedom to easily brick your phone if you are not careful. It's for people that want control over their data, like me. funny thing is that Microsoft, a closed source environment, is much more open then apple is when it comes to mobile platforms.
- Zippo, on 08/07/2008, -0/+0Well, there's definitely the chance that Apple could abuse this power... but it could also be useful if, say, an actual malicious app managed to get into the wild and was installed on iPhones... at least then it could be wiped in the quickest method possible.
- Kebie, on 08/07/2008, -0/+0Everyone here really likes Iphone top 10 lists though.
- Kebie, on 08/07/2008, -0/+0You guys would be tripping balls if Microsoft decided it could remove apps from your Windows Vista pc's or phoned home automatically without an option to disable and told them every app you installed. Comedy Apple apologists.
For some reason you don't even care that you can't install apps from other places if you really wanted to on your own iphone. - iDiggIt42, on 08/07/2008, -0/+0Shame, a game of Jesus and the raptors is a great way to pass time.
- Pegasus_Strain, on 08/07/2008, -0/+0Same here. I just did sync this AM too.
- contradictator, on 08/07/2008, -0/+0I wonder if Apple would refund buyers of apps they'd remove this way.
- chicagodj, on 08/07/2008, -0/+0wait a minute... that's not the same
you said OUR blackberries from OUR BES server (I wont even touch on the double server of "BES server")
To correct your analogy it would be like RIM being able to brick your blackberries from THEIR BES. - belden, on 08/07/2008, -0/+0Every other article on sites like Engadget I've read on this subject has been filled with comments from people outraged at Apple and talking about boycotting the App Store and burning Steve Jobs alive. I never thought I'd see the day when I'd come to Digg and see an intelligent and rational discussion about a subject.
I mean, no one has even said anything like: "***** YOU, two of my apps were remotely disabled by Apple." - DelMonte, on 08/07/2008, -0/+0Box office is back under a different name, it was indeed a trademark issue.
- DelMonte, on 08/07/2008, -1/+1iPhones applications also have to be signed, so what's your point again?
- DelMonte, on 08/07/2008, -0/+0I'm pretty sure that iPhone apps don't have the necessary write permissions to change their own name or the blacklist itself.
- worminater, on 08/07/2008, -0/+0Apple makes little to nothing on the free app. Read what you type; you proved my point.
- DelMonte, on 08/07/2008, -0/+0The Bible games (and all the other weird blue cartridges) were incidentally not certified by Nintendo.
- DelMonte, on 08/07/2008, -0/+0I would assume that this list is found outside the application sandbox and cannot be modified (or even read) by a malicious application.
Sure if someone finds a security hole and some app manages to get around write permissions, you're screwed, but nothing could really prevent damage anyway if that happens, aside from a firmware update.
So this blacklist is for apps that could do malicious things from inside their sandbox, like sending your personal info like your contacts and pictures to some server without your permission. I think that the majority of potential malicious apps would fall into this category and thus could be disabled without any problems. - xsecretfiles, on 08/07/2008, -0/+0I should write an app saying "HI STEVE! PLEASE ADOPT ME"
maybe he will see it.............maybe..... - ozziek, on 08/07/2008, -0/+0There's no danger of that happening as if it's a 3rd party app from the appstore it's more likely to crash when launched before it does anything ;)
- Aitese, on 08/07/2008, -1/+1I'm thinking more BEFORE you deploy them.
- spazzcat, on 08/07/2008, -0/+0I really don't understand why this would upset anyone. These are phones running on a cell phone network. If they missed something they would need to get rid of it before it brought down the network. If seems like a good safety net.
-
Show 51 - 92 of 92 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is