Re: Apple To Allow Third Party Apps ON iPhone

In article <13hcqqbi987vp68@corp.supernews.com>,
"Joel Koltner" <JKolstad71HatesSpam@yahoo.com> wrote:

> "Oxford" <colalovesmacs@mac.com> wrote in message
> news:colalovesmacs-88CE63.12564117102007@mpls-nnrp-05.inet.qwest.net...
> > expect sales of WinMobile, Symbian and Blackberries to dry up within a
> > year. this is good news for everyone!
>
> Not unless prices on iPhones drop significantly. Many people just don't use
> any 3rd-party applications on their phone in the first place -- probably at
> least 2/3rd of them: They're buying a phone based on what it can do "out of
> the box" and price.

You're making the mistake of comparing the iPhone's price to the price
of other phones. You might want to consider that the iPhone in the first
phone on the market which can reasonably take the place of an iPod, and
look at what people will happily pay for iPods.

(And yes, I'm quite aware there have been other music player phones, but
as we see in the music player market itself, most people don't consider
other music players to be reasonable iPod substitutes.)

Anyway, I'd expect Apple to be pretty aggressive with pricing. Because
they sell 80% of the world's music players, they can probably get better
prices on most components than their competitors.

> But I agree it's good news that Apple's opening up the iPhone to proper
> development.

--
"More than two decades later, it is hard to imagine the Revolutionary War coming
out any other way."
--George W. Bush in Martinsburg, W. Va., July 4, 2007

Oxford <colalovesmacs@mac.com> wrote in news:colalovesmacs-
88CE63.12564117102007@mpls-nnrp-05.inet.qwest.net:

> Some companies are already taking action. Nokia, for example,
is not
> allowing any applications to be loaded onto some of their
newest phones
> unless they have a digital signature that can be traced back to
a known
> developer. While this makes such a phone less than ütotally
open,ý we
> believe it is a step in the right direction. We are working on
an
> advanced system which will offer developers broad access to
natively
> program the iPhoneûs amazing software platform while at the
same time
> protecting users from malicious programs.
>
>

http://www.maemo.org/

The Linux community has provided me with some beautiful
applications for my new Nokia N800 that still amaze and keep me
interested......at no cost, should I choose not to participate.

Thank you, Nokia.....and Skype.....(c;


Larry
--
You can tell there's extremely
intelligent life in the universe
because they have never called Earth.

ZnU <znu@fake.invalid> wrote:

> In article <8NWdnRF_ccSVKYvanZ2dnUVZ_jqdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> "Ness_net" <richard@nomore.damn.spam.nessnet.com> wrote:
>
> > "Oxford" <colalovesmacs@mac.com> wrote in message
> > news:colalovesmacs-495069.18460517102007@mpls-nnrp-05.inet.qwest.net..
> > .
> > >
> > > no, blackberry doesn't stand a chance since by unit sales alone
> > > they will be miniscule by this time next year. all business
> > > software developers will FLOCK to the iPhone since they know that
> > > is the future of all smart phones. RIMM doesn't stand a chance
> > > against apple at this point in the game.
> > >
> >
> >
> > Just the above statement proves you don't have even a fraction of an
> > actual clue.
> >
> > Everything runs as root on an iPhone, which will keep 95% plus
> > percent of the (smart anyway) IT depts away - and most do and will
> > BAN the pretty (but flawed) toy.
>
> This is a dumb claim. Yes, everything currently runs as root on an
> iPhone. But running an app in a non-multiuser OS (what most other mobile
> platforms have) is the same thing as running an app as root.

It most certainly isn't.

> OS X provides a real permissions model, sandboxing, and application
> signing. I can't offhand think of a mobile platform that implements all
> three. Apple is also reusing robust battle-tested code from a real
> operating system. You can bet there have been a hell of a lot more hours
> invested in hardening the BSD networking stack than in hardening
> whatever proprietary networking code a BlackBerry has.

I suspect the iPhone runs a multi-user os set up as a single-user system
but not as root. To run it as root is playing with fire.

--

Immunity is better than innoculation.

Peter

In article <1i66kzq.17de1xaime2uvN%notinuse2@btinternet.com >,
notinuse2@btinternet.com (Peter Hayes) wrote:

> ZnU <znu@fake.invalid> wrote:
>
> > In article <8NWdnRF_ccSVKYvanZ2dnUVZ_jqdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> > "Ness_net" <richard@nomore.damn.spam.nessnet.com> wrote:
> >
> > > "Oxford" <colalovesmacs@mac.com> wrote in message
> > > news:colalovesmacs-495069.18460517102007@mpls-nnrp-05.inet.qwest.net..
> > > .
> > > >
> > > > no, blackberry doesn't stand a chance since by unit sales alone
> > > > they will be miniscule by this time next year. all business
> > > > software developers will FLOCK to the iPhone since they know that
> > > > is the future of all smart phones. RIMM doesn't stand a chance
> > > > against apple at this point in the game.
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Just the above statement proves you don't have even a fraction of an
> > > actual clue.
> > >
> > > Everything runs as root on an iPhone, which will keep 95% plus
> > > percent of the (smart anyway) IT depts away - and most do and will
> > > BAN the pretty (but flawed) toy.
> >
> > This is a dumb claim. Yes, everything currently runs as root on an
> > iPhone. But running an app in a non-multiuser OS (what most other mobile
> > platforms have) is the same thing as running an app as root.
>
> It most certainly isn't.

Of course it is. Running as root simply means there are no user-based
permissions that prevent processes from doing whatever they like.
Single-user operating systems don't have user-based permissions at all,
therefore there obviously can't be any user-based permissions that
prevent processes from doing whatever they like.

The "don't run anything as root" mantra has been repeated so many times
that people have some sort of irrational fear of it. It's true that it's
less secure than the alternatives offered by multi-user operating
systems... but running OS 9 or Windows 98, one was essentially always
running as root, and the same is true of most mobile operating systems
today.

[snip]

--
"More than two decades later, it is hard to imagine the Revolutionary War coming
out any other way."
--George W. Bush in Martinsburg, W. Va., July 4, 2007

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2191348,00.asp

First, the iPhone root password was broken. OK, it happens. But now it seems
that all applications run on the iPhone as root. Can you say biggest
security blunder of the 21st century to date?



"ZnU" <znu@fake.invalid> wrote in message
news:znu-3F7E6C.00393118102007@news.individual.net...
> In article <8NWdnRF_ccSVKYvanZ2dnUVZ_jqdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> "Ness_net" <richard@nomore.damn.spam.nessnet.com> wrote:
>
>> "Oxford" <colalovesmacs@mac.com> wrote in message
>> news:colalovesmacs-495069.18460517102007@mpls-nnrp-05.inet.qwest.net..
>> .
>> >
>> > no, blackberry doesn't stand a chance since by unit sales alone
>> > they will be miniscule by this time next year. all business
>> > software developers will FLOCK to the iPhone since they know that
>> > is the future of all smart phones. RIMM doesn't stand a chance
>> > against apple at this point in the game.
>> >
>>
>>
>> Just the above statement proves you don't have even a fraction of an
>> actual clue.
>>
>> Everything runs as root on an iPhone, which will keep 95% plus
>> percent of the (smart anyway) IT depts away - and most do and will
>> BAN the pretty (but flawed) toy.
>
> This is a dumb claim. Yes, everything currently runs as root on an
> iPhone. But running an app in a non-multiuser OS (what most other mobile
> platforms have) is the same thing as running an app as root.
>
> OS X provides a real permissions model, sandboxing, and application
> signing. I can't offhand think of a mobile platform that implements all
> three. Apple is also reusing robust battle-tested code from a real
> operating system. You can bet there have been a hell of a lot more hours
> invested in hardening the BSD networking stack than in hardening
> whatever proprietary networking code a BlackBerry has.
>
> Security is just one of many areas where the fact that the iPhone is
> using a slimmed down version of a real desktop OS gives Apple
> significant advantages over its competitors. (Well, except possibly its
> Linux-based competitors, but at least in the US Linux-based phones don't
> seem to have gotten anywhere.)
>
> [snip]
>
> --
> "More than two decades later, it is hard to imagine the Revolutionary War
> coming
> out any other way."
> --George W. Bush in Martinsburg, W. Va., July 4,
> 2007
>

In article <x6ednZmsveuoPoranZ2dnUVZ_jydnZ2d@giganews.com>,
"Ness Net" <richard@nomore.damn.spam.nessnet.com> wrote:

[top-posting fixed]

> "ZnU" <znu@fake.invalid> wrote in message
> news:znu-3F7E6C.00393118102007@news.individual.net...
> > In article <8NWdnRF_ccSVKYvanZ2dnUVZ_jqdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> > "Ness_net" <richard@nomore.damn.spam.nessnet.com> wrote:
> >
> >> "Oxford" <colalovesmacs@mac.com> wrote in message
> >> news:colalovesmacs-495069.18460517102007@mpls-nnrp-05.inet.qwest.net..
> >> .
> >> >
> >> > no, blackberry doesn't stand a chance since by unit sales alone
> >> > they will be miniscule by this time next year. all business
> >> > software developers will FLOCK to the iPhone since they know that
> >> > is the future of all smart phones. RIMM doesn't stand a chance
> >> > against apple at this point in the game.
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Just the above statement proves you don't have even a fraction of an
> >> actual clue.
> >>
> >> Everything runs as root on an iPhone, which will keep 95% plus
> >> percent of the (smart anyway) IT depts away - and most do and will
> >> BAN the pretty (but flawed) toy.
> >
> > This is a dumb claim. Yes, everything currently runs as root on an
> > iPhone. But running an app in a non-multiuser OS (what most other mobile
> > platforms have) is the same thing as running an app as root.
> >
> > OS X provides a real permissions model, sandboxing, and application
> > signing. I can't offhand think of a mobile platform that implements all
> > three. Apple is also reusing robust battle-tested code from a real
> > operating system. You can bet there have been a hell of a lot more hours
> > invested in hardening the BSD networking stack than in hardening
> > whatever proprietary networking code a BlackBerry has.
> >
> > Security is just one of many areas where the fact that the iPhone is
> > using a slimmed down version of a real desktop OS gives Apple
> > significant advantages over its competitors. (Well, except possibly its
> > Linux-based competitors, but at least in the US Linux-based phones don't
> > seem to have gotten anywhere.)
>
> http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2191348,00.asp
>
> First, the iPhone root password was broken. OK, it happens. But now it seems
> that all applications run on the iPhone as root. Can you say biggest
> security blunder of the 21st century to date?

Did you not understand anything I wrote above?

--
"More than two decades later, it is hard to imagine the Revolutionary War coming
out any other way."
--George W. Bush in Martinsburg, W. Va., July 4, 2007

On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 11:17:00 -0700, "Ness Net"
<richard@nomore.damn.spam.nessnet.com> wrote:

>First, the iPhone root password was broken. OK, it happens. But now it seems
>that all applications run on the iPhone as root. Can you say biggest
>security blunder of the 21st century to date?

Wasn't W re-elected in 2004?

-- Larry

1st - top posting - bite me. Self appointed Usenet cops can
kiss my ass.

2nd - I read it and contend that you are not correct.


"ZnU" <znu@fake.invalid> wrote in message
news:znu-281E90.15014618102007@news.individual.net...
>
> [top-posting fixed]
>
>
> Did you not understand anything I wrote above?
>

notinuse2@btinternet.com (Peter Hayes) wrote in
news:1i66kzq.17de1xaime2uvN%notinuse2@btinternet.c om:

> I suspect the iPhone runs a multi-user os set up as a single-user system
> but not as root. To run it as root is playing with fire.
>
> -

Isn't root access what Apple and ATT have, with a backdoor service
accessible over the air....and what YOU have is the one user it supports,
with lots of stuff locked away you cannot access because you are never
root?

I had a live Iphone, that wasn't a demo, in my hands at a cafe while the
medical student that owned it was perusing my Nokia N800 Linux box on wifi.
It had a really neat protective skin on it I wish I had for my N800 besides
the leather case. I think I really liked it because it was FLAT BLACK
making the display appear much brighter without your eyes being blinded by
the glitz.

He said he was ordering an N800 and two 8GB SDHC cards from buy.com
tonight....(c; Oops!


Larry
--
You can tell there's extremely
intelligent life in the universe
because they have never called Earth.

In article <SZidnUkJxMCKQ4ranZ2dnUVZ_uygnZ2d@giganews.com>,
"Ness Net" <richard@nomore.damn.spam.nessnet.com> wrote:

> 1st - top posting - bite me. Self appointed Usenet cops can
> kiss my ass.
>
> 2nd - I read it and contend that you are not correct.

Please explain how using a user account that ignores user-based
permissions on a multiuser OS is meaningfully different form the normal
state of affairs on an OS that doesn't have user-based permissions.

> "ZnU" <znu@fake.invalid> wrote in message
> news:znu-281E90.15014618102007@news.individual.net...
> >
> > [top-posting fixed]
> >
> >
> > Did you not understand anything I wrote above?

--
"More than two decades later, it is hard to imagine the Revolutionary War coming
out any other way."
--George W. Bush in Martinsburg, W. Va., July 4, 2007