11–20 of 144 posts
I don't much like Android as a system but at least I can strip it of Google services and install a firewall and feel reasonably private. It's not an ideal option but it works.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't get why people believe that Apple is so much better than any of the other big ones.. http://www.businessinsider.com/uber-iphone-app-secret-access... Apple always refuses to comment on bugs, security holes and basically anything they can not use for marketing. You WANT to believe that Apple is better.
how hard would it be for a bunch of semiconductor / cpu designers / cs students to team up and release a nice open hardware so that we can forget about PRISM and the likes ?
And yet, making the actual switch is a tremendously difficult task. On the software side alone, it requires recompiling every application you want to run on your platform. That doesn't even touch the cost of rolling the actual hardware. There are more than a few examples of this: Intel's Itanium, Oracle's SPARC, Berkeley's MIPS, Transmeta's Crusoe, etc. Sure, these all had niches (embedded systems, research hardware, a few high-end servers) -- but breaking out into the mainstream (a.k.a. like x86-64 and ARM/ARM64) is damn near impossible.
It helps when you don't have an ads business branch.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
how hard would it be for a bunch of semiconductor / cpu designers / cs students to team up and release a nice open hardware so that we can forget about PRISM and the likes ?
That's the whole idea behind the RISC-V platform [1]. It's well-funded, well-designed, has amazing pedigree (David Patterson literally wrote the book on computer architecture). It's even licensed such that companies can use it in proprietary designs. And yet, making the actual switch is a tremendously difficult task. On the software side alone, it requires recompiling every application you want to run on your platfor…
- Less bugs
- Potentially better applications since the lower layers are stable and don't require you to fight it (as an example, pre vulkan drivers were hell, linux software has to circle around that)
The iPhone is unbelievably fragile, before you look at the high price. Apple bends over backwards to deny the existence of design flaws, to the point of blaming users for doing it wrong. Despite this I am seriously considering an iPhone, their stance on privacy is the only reason.
> Despite this I am seriously considering an iPhone, their stance on privacy is the only reason. That's definitely a great reason to get one. A nice bonus you'll find, once you do, is that they're nowhere near as fragile as you fear.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
how hard would it be for a bunch of semiconductor / cpu designers / cs students to team up and release a nice open hardware so that we can forget about PRISM and the likes ?
That's the whole idea behind the RISC-V platform [1]. It's well-funded, well-designed, has amazing pedigree (David Patterson literally wrote the book on computer architecture). It's even licensed such that companies can use it in proprietary designs. And yet, making the actual switch is a tremendously difficult task. On the software side alone, it requires recompiling every application you want to run on your platfor…
Nobody expects RISC-V to beat i7 or Ryzen in any benchmarks.
IMO its purpose is to be the in hardware what GNU/Linux was in software.
edit: GNU/Linux, not just Linux :)
It helps when you don't have an ads business branch.
This might as well be titled - Forget Iphone X-Apple's Best Product is that they are not out to sell you anything else - ads (Google) or other products (Amazon). If a stance on something is due not having a particular type of business, is it really worth the praise?