Apple Fails Twice in a Week!

[Johnny Dangerously]

First Steve Jobs can't connect to WiFi or AT&T service & now iPads with 3G have a security flaw.


http://gawker.com/5559346/

Apple has suffered another embarrassment. A security breach has exposed iPad owners including dozens of CEOs, military officials, and top politicians. They—and every other buyer of the cellular-enabled tablet—could be vulnerable to spam marketing and malicious hacking...


`

[Birdman]

:oops:

[JTB]

First Steve Jobs can't connect to WiFi or AT&T service & now iPads with 3G have a security flaw.


http://gawker.com/5559346/

Apple has suffered another embarrassment. A security breach has exposed iPad owners including dozens of CEOs, military officials, and top politicians. They—and every other buyer of the cellular-enabled tablet—could be vulnerable to spam marketing and malicious hacking...


`


It's be fixed with a software update in a matter of hours.

Historically Windows has had more security flaws in a week than Apple has in two years, so their track record with protecting customers is solid.

Since we switched 5 years ago I have spent ZERO on anti-virus software on the 3 Apples at home and the 12 at the office, saving $1000's.

And as I mentioned before, we have all had wi-fi issues and yes the timing was poor, but as soon as the connection was up, the spectulatar new iPhone eclipsed the conectivity issue at the start of the presentation. And the only people talking about were the world's 15 Microsoft Zune users. :bigguy:

Apple may have had two recent fails but with with complete twat like Ballmer running the company, Microsoft are failing everyday.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvsboPUjrGc

[Joe G]

Whaaaa?? Apples AREN'T perfect like everyone says?

I thought Apples have ZERO problems with security and viruses?? :doh2:








Problem was that Apples made up a very small piece of the computer market. Anyone who wanted to cause problems would go after where the biggest market was - PC's. Now that Apple is growing (iPhone, iPad etc), you'll see an explosion of new problems.


Mark my words. :judge:

[Johnny Dangerously]

Whaaaa?? Apples AREN'T perfect like everyone says?

I thought Apples have ZERO problems with security and viruses?? :doh2:

Problem was that Apples made up a very small piece of the computer market. Anyone who wanted to cause problems would go after where the biggest market was - PC's. Now that Apple is growing (iPhone, iPad etc), you'll see an explosion of new problems.

Mark my words. :judge:
That is exactly what our IT guys say. If the business world had gone Mac back in the late 80s-early 90s things would be 180 degrees different.

Why would you create something that would only inconvenience a few people when you can just as easily inconvenience thousands for the same effort.


Now that Apple is bigger than Microsoft, will the governments of the world go after them like they did Microsoft?


`

[JTB]

Whaaaa?? Apples AREN'T perfect like everyone says?

I thought Apples have ZERO problems with security and viruses?? :doh2:








Problem was that Apples made up a very small piece of the computer market. Anyone who wanted to cause problems would go after where the biggest market was - PC's. Now that Apple is growing (iPhone, iPad etc), you'll see an explosion of new problems.


Mark my words. :judge:

You've bumped your head JoeGee, Apple's OS is unix based inherently much more secure and difficult to compromise than WINDOWS.
The reality is APPLE is worth more than Microsoft because the company makes simple to use products, that people want and supports them with the industry's best customer service and the stock reflects that. Apple is a company with a future, not one that keeps rolling out BOLLOCKS like the ZUNE and Vista.

Apple still has a very, very small share of the computer market compared to Microsoft.

[Boston Mike]

You've bumped your head JoeGee, Apple's OS is unix based inherently much more secure and difficult to compromise than WINDOWS.
The reality is APPLE is worth more than Microsoft because the company makes simple to use products, that people want and supports them with the industry's best customer service and the stock reflects that. Apple is a company with a future, not one that keeps rolling out BOLLOCKS like the ZUNE and Vista.

Apple still has a very, very small share of the computer market compared to Microsoft.

yeah, as soon as an imac throws the "Blue Screen of Death", then I'll be worried.

:haha:

[Alloy Dave]

It's be fixed with a software update in a matter of hours.

Historically Windows has had more security flaws in a week than Apple has in two years, so their track record with protecting customers is solid.

Since we switched 5 years ago I have spent ZERO on anti-virus software on the 3 Apples at home and the 12 at the office, saving $1000's.

And as I mentioned before, we have all had wi-fi issues and yes the timing was poor, but as soon as the connection was up, the spectulatar new iPhone eclipsed the conectivity issue at the start of the presentation. And the only people talking about were the world's 15 Microsoft Zune users. :bigguy:

Apple may have had two recent fails but with with complete twat like Ballmer running the company, Microsoft are failing everyday.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvsboPUjrGc

Saving thousands? what virus software costs that much? :doh2: I paid $69 for three years on McAfee, and now I use free Microsoft Security Essentials.

[68fastback]

Even the faithfull are starting to figure Jobs out (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=269070).

He is brilliant and has an keen business eye for spotting nexus strategies and plugging those intersects with creative products.

But he's also a business predator and a ruthless, arrogant and egotistical s.o.b. ...and has been for a decades, imho.

On his way down there will be many who know and will remember how he got where he is.

[JTB]

Even the faithfull are starting to figure Jobs out (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=269070).

He is brilliant and has an keen business eye for spotting nexus strategies and plugging those intersects with creative products.

But he's also a business predator and a ruthless, arrogant and egotistical s.o.b. ...and has been for a decades, imho.

On his way down there will be many who know and will remember how he got where he is.


:buttkick:


And Buffett, GATES and Murdoch aren't?

And for the record Jobs has already been down, way down a total flame out in fact, forced out of his own company. He returned.

[JTB]

Saving thousands? what virus software costs that much? :doh2: I paid $69 for three years on McAfee, and now I use free Microsoft Security Essentials.


How much was a quality anti-virus software 6 years ago?

FYI. It was around $70 per machine.

Microsoft Essential was only a response to the increasing public outcry to the cavalcade of viruses that constantly infected Windows machines.

Microsoft should have had Essentials 10 years ago as it works great on our one remaining DELL left in the office and as a small business owner I like free. :yes:
But Bill still gets a card :redcard: for taking so long to roll out free Anti-Virus software which is really just a band-aid for an unsecured OS.

[Cobra Drifter]

Apple sucks!!! :grin:

[Boston Mike]

Aha, so it wasn't an Apple breach. It was a breach on AT&T's systems. And yes, AT&T sux. But for all you Apple haters: :moon:


http://money.cnn.com/2010/06/10/technology/att_ipad_fbi/index.htm

[68fastback]

:buttkick:


And Buffett, GATES and Murdoch aren't?

And for the record Jobs has already been down, way down a total flame out in fact, forced out of his own company. He returned.

Dunno much about Buffet the man, but while he may be ruthless, he doesn't he doesn't strike me as a business predator (opportunist for sure tho), not does he strike me as arrogant or egotistical. Like SJ he's good at waht he does but doesn't seem to cross the 'line.' Gates was was much like SJ, imo, when younger -- not any longer. But I'd certainly put Ellison (Oracle) tight up there with SJ ...folks to whom business ethics seems just an annoyance.

If SJ didn't go back the company would have gone under, imo. That's why Apple bought NeXT in the mid-90s -- to get Jobs back. Nearly a half-billion, if I recall. They were foundering without him. He's got the 'vision' in that business and managed it top down with an iron fist -- and does now again. That can work for quite a while with extraordinary vision, but will eventually cause a major faulter since there's little or no bottom-up safety/feedback to 'trap' a big top-down judgement error ...that will inevitably occur ...again. When it does happen his ego will either force him to bail (because he has a 'revolutionary' idea he 'must' persue -lol) or, more likely, force a suboptimum ego-driven response -- if he's not forced out again before that. These are patterns that are as certain as another asteroid hitting earth -- it's not a question of if, just when. Dictatorship is simply a defective management model over the long term.

Apple was so bad off at one point they had to mortgage the rights to their OS (which IBM bought) to stay afloat . Then, with that money, essentially, they funded IBM to do OS-processor design optimization and chip fab design for them (actual fab may have been ultimately subcontracted to Motorola, uncertain) ...stuff you'll not read in the papers. Why would IBM do that? Naively, imo, they thought they could gain Unix savvy that way -- or at least get insight on how efficient the design was. IBM never marketed anything based on it, bit it did force seeding skills that eventually bootstrapped Unix in IBM. Of course, you don't get savvy from buying rights -- you get it from painstaking HR skill development. It was in that timeframe that x-86 dual boot Apple and MS OS work was explored. Somewhat ironically, in that timeframe IBM was trying to go 'open' standards and UNIX (for a coule of key reasons) while Apple was trying to move to a more cost-effective and ubiquitous Intel base because their unique architecture saddled them with artificially high costs, held them hostage to that one-off hardwre and was squeezing their existing customer base ... all of which was driving them down the tubes.

Jobs knew they had to break aout of the 'trap' and go to an Intel base. he also knew the future was not in the 'PC' wars, but in spotting future convergence in the marketplace and position product smack dab where the train tracks cross -- he is masterfull at envisioning and conceptualizing new product at such intesects.

My quarrel is with his 'style' (or lack thereof), not his success -- it's how he manages his business. He's a business 'terrorist' ...a 'hostage' paradigm that commands tenuous respect out of fear -- even among his direct management team. His customers are seen as 'meat' from which blood is to be extracted, imo ...this works fine as long as you're products are sufficiently 'enlightened' in a changing marketplace such that you are still able to define the changing market itself. Eventually, the profitable intersects will shift away from integrating existing technology and they will again become dependent on fundamental technological breakthroughs -- a game Apple is not equipped to play well (they are not a technology company) -- and such a shift will eventually do serious damage to Apple -- again ...because you can't dictate technological breakthroughs. He will then thrive again on the next wave of technology comoditization -- when he can work his brilliant nexus-intercept strategies. But it's getting across that next 'gap' that will potentially take Apple down again -- both because they are not well structured for such shifts in technology (tho they're better equipped than they were 10-15 years ago) and because their management paradigm is ill-matched to such shifts. Jmo.

My bet is that Apple knows this. At their currect growth rate they could take a very different approach in the future and use those assets to shift into a technology acquisition mode. That is, deploy their nexus-convergence strategy at a core technology level and bleed the existing technology to find the transition ...a riskier game requiring much deeper insights and much deeper pockets (which they are rapidly acquiring). The irony is that in a technology-driven paradigm his management skills will be a far poorer match tha today, imo. *If* that's the track they'll be on, I'd look for Apple to make a some major technology acquisitions on the next economic upswing. I'd also look for Apple to restructure their existing businesses as more autonomous units ...exploiters of the technology they would then control. Both of those would be a signal of such a strategy, imo. Of course, this assumes the next round of fundamental technological breakthroughs 'play' to his vision. Vision is a funny thing: when you're zeroed-in it's magic, decisions are methodilcal, and the future is transparent to the visionary. When you're not it's it's frustration, decisions tend to be knee-jerk (reactive acquisitions) and the future is more opaque. Jobs is a visionary ...if it's not there, he'll be gone. Jmo.

[Alloy Dave]

How much was a quality anti-virus software 6 years ago?

FYI. It was around $70 per machine.

Microsoft Essential was only a response to the increasing public outcry to the cavalcade of viruses that constantly infected Windows machines.

Microsoft should have had Essentials 10 years ago as it works great on our one remaining DELL left in the office and as a small business owner I like free. :yes:
But Bill still gets a card :redcard: for taking so long to roll out free Anti-Virus software which is really just a band-aid for an unsecured OS.

So your comment about thousands of dollars was for many computers I assume?

[Joker]

Apple has some great products for sure. But Windows made PC's what they are today. Apple would have the same virus problems and security holes if they had as many people trying to hack into it as Windows does. Don't get fooled by thinking any Mac OS X, or Apple OS is super secure!

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/hack-windows-security-snow-leopard,8704.html

http://news.cnet.com/8301-27080_3-10444561-245.html

Mac hacked in 10 seconds!

http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9129978/Researcher_cracks_Mac_in_10_seconds_at_PWN2OWN_win s_5k

[Alloy Dave]

I can see both sides of this. Yes, they have fewer viruses on Mac today. To Joker's comment, I agree it's mainly because no one is trying to hack them. But then think of it this way. One could argue that 1971 VW beetle's are theft-proof because fewer people are trying to steal them. If your goal is to have a car no one wants to steal, buy a 1971 beetle. One could argue "yes, but if the beetle were worth $100,000 in scrap parts, people WOULD steal them." that's true, but they are NOT worth that much.

Until Macs are as popular as PCs, we'll likely see this trend continue. For now, Macs seem safer, but not completely safe.

For me, I am trained on a PC and use one extensively at work...so the choice is to stay with that at home. Once I no longer work, I may consider switching to a Mac.

[JTB]

So your comment about thousands of dollars was for many computers I assume?

:tiphat:

[Joker]

Until Macs are as popular as PCs, we'll likely see this trend continue. For now, Macs seem safer, but not completely safe.



I know those links may be alot of reading Dave, but they show that any OS can be hacked and none are in reality safer then the others. Basically, it boils down to the user. As in real life, humans make the difference. Many issues on viruses etc, are from operator error and clicking on stuff on unsecured or under secured computers. Viruses are actually on the decline many experts say. Now it's the phishing stuff and financial crimes that the hackers want to make happen on your computer.

[Joe G]

I know those links may be alot of reading Dave...

Have you seen some of the financial links Dave's posted in the past?? :faint:


Talk about a LOT of reading!! :yikes:

[68fastback]

I know those links may be alot of reading Dave, but they show that any OS can be hacked and none are in reality safer then the others. Basically, it boils down to the user. As in real life, humans make the difference. Many issues on viruses etc, are from operator error and clicking on stuff on unsecured or under secured computers. Viruses are actually on the decline many experts say. Now it's the phishing stuff and financial crimes that the hackers want to make happen on your computer.

So very true!

---

A broader perspective: ...I've read most cyber crime attacks now originate in Asia ...directed largely by governments ...especially China, Russia and (surprisingly) N.Korea. It's an all out cyber war already. According to Richard A. Clarke (counter-terrorism guru to three US administrations) *all* the plans for the fifth-gen F-35 Lightning-II were hacked by China via the aircraft manugfacturer's network ...and that's just one of many we know of. Scary stuff. When Israel took out Syria's nuclear facility a couple years back they could do so with no radar detection worries because they had hacked the Syrian radar (a very currect technology). The Pentagon has been hacked numerous times according to Clarke too. From what I've read, we're much better at the offensive end of the cyber game the defensive end. He contends the defensive game is much tougher because of how wer structure and contract projects -- not too difficult to compromise code or hardware in development. Imagine if China could make th F35 fall out of the air at will -- Clarke used that specific example as conceptual scenario in a recent interview. There's no airtight anti-hack approach in a world where 787s, cars and power-grids all embody their functional essence in software and hardware that often sources across a dozen countries and 50+ subcontractors ...in systems of many millions lines of code and billions of app-specific hardware circuits it's virtually impossible to detect a trap-door placed by a hacked/infiltrated contractor, etc. Scary stuff.

[Alloy Dave]

Have you seen some of the financial links Dave's posted in the past?? :faint:


Talk about a LOT of reading!! :yikes:

:doh2:

[Tommy Gun]

First Steve Jobs can't connect to WiFi or AT&T service & now iPads with 3G have a security flaw.


http://gawker.com/5559346/

Apple has suffered another embarrassment. A security breach has exposed iPad owners including dozens of CEOs, military officials, and top politicians. They—and every other buyer of the cellular-enabled tablet—could be vulnerable to spam marketing and malicious hacking...


`


I'd bet Steve can't connect to anything at the moment. :popcorn:


.

[Gr8snkbite]

:nonono:

[Joe G]

I'd bet Steve can't connect to anything at the moment. :popcorn:


.No WiFi in the afterworld? :yikes:

[68fastback]

:rofl3: iPost ...telepathic post-whoring! Ohmmmmmmm. :haha:

[Tommy Gun]

:rofl3: iPost ...telepathic post-whoring! Ohmmmmmmm. :haha:


I never was sure what an Ohm is? :look:

[68fastback]

It's a unit of resistance :biggrin:

...since, with Microsoft, resitance is futile...

...it therefore must be a measure of futility too :shades:

:logical: :spitcopy:

[Joe G]

It's a unit of resistance :biggrin:

...since, with Microsoft, resitance is futile...

...it therefore must be a measure of futility too :shades:

:logical: :spitcopy: :giggle:

[Tommy Gun]

:groan:

[68fastback]

I don't know if anyone's been following the Apple Samsung legal battles around the world and Apple's full-court press attach on Android, etc but, recently, Apple had a couple of 'blocks' squashed by courts in the US and elsewhere, so it would seem they've decided to get dirty and go the 'troll' route ...fascnating stuff!

This article (Apple cuts deal with the devil...) (http://techcrunch.com/2011/12/09/apple-made-a-deal-with-the-devil-no-worse-a-patent-troll/)doesn't give you the technical basis of the Samsung/etc battle but is very interesting because this is the the first fairly undeniable hint that Apple is now entrenched in employing the 'troll-attack' ...typically a company only sells patents to trolls when they can't afford a self-defense so us it as a way to raise money while retaing their interest and rights in the any subsequent results. I notice the professional pundits are questioning the merit of Apple doing this sinc ethey have gobs of cash and there are many other channelts they can persue (assuming some of the patents under question aren't garbage-patents as Smasung claims -- I suspect some are and some aren't). However, I think the 'pro' pundits are overlooking one *huge* reason why Apple is [not so curiously to me] using a troll hit-man to do their dirty work.

Ok, Apple uses leverage to sell their products ...very nice leading-edge products with lots of hype, artificial exclusivity and high high prices (which is why it's Amazon that may eventually dethrone Apple, but that's whole other discussion). We all know their products have a 'religious' following (for whatever reasons, doesn't matter -lol). So, why debase yourself in the corproate community and use patent trolls? Simple! Apple can't afford to risk court decisions that can tranish them with their religious followers. Anything that can corrode image potentially damages their ability to lever exclusivity. Image corrosion can lead to a revolt and that could be devastating for Apple ...especially as the competitive sharks start to feed (there's also is already a long-smoldering revolt within the Apple community that's been gaining some momentum ...not surprisingly, those pi$$ed at artificial exclusivity and intentionally disabled downward compatibilities, etc).

So, there's much less long term business risk using patent trolls and *no* media connection to Apple if they (umm, I mean the trolls) lose. If the trolls win, Apple wins. If the trolls lose, Apple will be forced to permit Android competitors in those markets to continue selling their products (yes, Apple is trying to block *all* Android devices globally) but there will be no embarassment among the religious (key to preservation of the faith) since they will not even see such 'losses' in the media tied to Apple in any way.

It's a brilliant strategy and reinforces what's no secret among Apple business watches -- that's Apple's business pran is centered around litigation to block competition because, otherwise, their products are just good products at rediculous prices -- a business model that cannot be sustained long-term.

It is curious that this happens so soon after Jobs death. Remember, these suits have been hot and heavy for two years now, some longer. Somehow I'm thinking Jobs would be facing this issues straight-up. Now that he's gone this may be the new face of Apple's patent litigation. Clealy it will be decryed by those battling the broader patent-troll problem -- which is the primary motivation for the proposed USPTO patent-criteria changes (surrounding first-documented vs first instance, etc).

Anyhow, this does say *one* thing that can't be denied ...Apple has now telegraphed that they either fear that at least one key patent is baseless and/or that they fear related court losses (should they occur) will significaant hurt their business model and, clearly, future earnings.

Let the games begin ...this particular issue can be stalled for a couple more years ...long enough for Apple to protect current technology revenues (tho they did miss the street's expectations of recent). Let's see how the current Apple management team is fairing two to three technology generations down the road.

Don't wait too long to convert your Apple stock to Amazon (or whoever -lol) ...the next 5 years will be interesting -- the next 15 decisive. We shall see. Apple still has plenty of time to 'wake up' and shift to a less customer-exploiting business model ...but it's hard to to go cold-turkey on crack.

[Joe G]

Whaaaa?? Apples AREN'T perfect like everyone says?

I thought Apples have ZERO problems with security and viruses?? :doh2:








Problem was that Apples made up a very small piece of the computer market. Anyone who wanted to cause problems would go after where the biggest market was - PC's. Now that Apple is growing (iPhone, iPad etc), you'll see an explosion of new problems.


Mark my words. :judge:

Hmmm... :look:


http://www.technolog.msnbc.msn.com/technology/technolog/apple-tones-down-mac-virus-immunity-claims-after-infections-844651



Apple tones down Mac virus immunity claims after infections


"Apple has made some changes to how it describes Macs' resistance to viruses following a wave of infections in April. The Flashback botnet affected hundreds of thousands of computers, the vast majority of which were running OS X, so the longstanding claim that "It doesn’t get PC viruses" was clearly no longer tenable."

[Joe G]

Before... and after. :giggle:




http://msnbcmedia1.msn.com/j/streams/2012/June/120625/431163-osx-virus.streams_desktop_medium.jpg

[68fastback]

Revisionist history works well with religious/political faithful since they'll never see it as such and they don't care about competitive platforms/solutions anyway so no damage to existing 'fan' base ...of course that can potentially pigenon-hole overall growth in the future, but just denying the problem and ignoring previous 'lies' and putting such vapid positioning on the user works well when you rule the faithfull's pulpit :shades:

Their 'updated' statement does sound suspiciously like a no-op since it puts the burden on the user ...isn't that what Apple had derided the PC for doing to their users in all those insipid commercials for so many years? :yes: I guess it's a good thing now? -lol- but also seems to telegraph a shift that sounds more like "hackers - don't pick on me" vs having any technical basis of protection whatsoever. Jmo.

I've also noticed that AV companies have recently be targeting Apple platforms ..i.but it's hard to do for such closed/predatory sotware. Still, AV is big business and Apple can't control them entirely -- should be interesting to watch but, overall, it's political much-ado-about-nothing I think since hackers will hack but the revisionist-history position change seems targeted more at appearing friendly to new business without saying anything substantive ...has worked for a long time.

This will really get interesting as the mobile get more and more powerful and become more 'usefull' to hack as well. Jmo.