121–130 of 373 posts
Messages is great, but is there a way to get every iMessage duplicated across iPhone / Mac? Otherwise you send an iMessage, close the mac, grap the iPhone and go away, but never get the reply back. And so forth.
Messages is great, but is there a way to get every iMessage duplicated across iPhone / Mac? Otherwise you send an iMessage, close the mac, grap the iPhone and go away, but never get the reply back. And so forth.
It's duplicated for me. A conversation I had with a friend via iMessage and his iPhone sync'd up on my phone a few minutes later.
According to the screenshots, the spotlight icon is no longer on the top right, getting shuffled over to the left by presumably a new icon to invoke notification center. That's a really bad choice. The corners are the click targets fastest to reach (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fittss_law ), and demoting searching in favor of 'reading messages that have popped up before' doesn't strike me as quite well-balanced.
I actually like it better -- I'm much more likely to activate notifications with a mouse, so I'd much rather have that be the "bigger" target.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Malware writers will just get free ids and sign their malware. Will all of these OSX devices be regularly polling Apple to get a list of revoked certs? Yes, the first problem will be to create some malware from OS X first. You know, the biggest success so far had been that Mac Defender, that was: a) a trojan (you had to install it yourself) and b) only affected like 10 users
If malware on OSX is as small a problem as you're suggesting, why is Apple bothering with any of this? Is it to wrestle further control of the app eco-system on OSX? Or is it just security theatre? Or both? Something else? The current app eco-system doesn't allow them to just switch off the ability for people to install arbitrary apps. They need to get themselves into a situation where the vast majority of apps are s…
I don't understand the question. Apple has been improving OS X security mechanisms in every OS X update. From "address space layout randomization" to the "first run warning". This is another step in the same direction.
Are you implying that Apple should only do something about OS X security AFTER malware on OS X get's to be a problem? Because, I'd rather they do it BEFORE.
And I fail to see how pro-actively making an OS more secure is "security theater".
Then it will be a lot easier for them to require apps to be signed. For your own protection of course.
Of course. I miss the irony here. Signed applications are touted by security experts as a highly successful security measure. Are you suggesting it is otherwise or are you just confusing the potential of misuse of that feature with that feature being meaningless?
* After all, if developer IDs are so easy and free to get, and will make it easier for people to install your app. Why wouldn't you get it signed?*
Yeah, why? Surely not for the $100 it takes.
SSL certificates cost money too, but I don't see anybody suggesting running your web app in plain HTTP is better, or that paid certificates hamper secure web application development.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And that's the point the Apple TV goes from a hobby to a major product. Spending a £1000 on a Mac - I reckon another £100 for an Apple TV with that functionality as the hook is a pretty easy up sell.
It is unfortunate that AppleTV's video output (out-of-the-box) still does not support true 1080p resolutions and everything is upscaled from 720p.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Out of interest how would you feel about it if developer licenses were free for students? I would be much happier (to the effect of actually seeing more good than bad in this restriction) if getting that ID was a matter of filling out a form an passing a turing test - so, for example, if any apple ID could be used to get a signing certificate, that would be much better. (edit: this is not about the money. It's about…
That's interesting. My feeling is that the problem her is with the Apple Developer network rather than the functionality - I think the functionality just highlights the problem. Personally I'd like to see the price on Developer licenses dropped and made free for full time or part time students. I think it would make commercial and PR sense for Apple too - show that they are developer friendly and make the Mac attract…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Gruber was telling that the Apple ID was going to be free. It isn't. It requires a Mac Developer account as far as I could understand it. When I was 15 I wrote a Taskbar dialer for Windows 9x and later NT (this was in the modem days. Of course I haven't updated it in ages and the only reason my old webpage is still there is because I found it by accident in an old backup, but here is a google search for it: https://w…
$100 does not stop anyone from realizing their dreams. Teenagers know how to make extra cash. $100 is less than 2 days work at a minimum wage job. I would much rather have teenagers work to be able to pay $100 to distribute signed applications than make it free for anyone (malware makers) to distribute signed apps. The trade off isn't even close here. It's free to develop the app, and even distribute it outside of th…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And that's the point the Apple TV goes from a hobby to a major product. Spending a £1000 on a Mac - I reckon another £100 for an Apple TV with that functionality as the hook is a pretty easy up sell.
It is unfortunate that AppleTV's video output (out-of-the-box) still does not support true 1080p resolutions and everything is upscaled from 720p.
Beyond that, Apple may not have wanted to take A5 chips away from the iPhone and iPad to sell in Apple TVs. Now that all of the new iPads and iPhones will be A6 based this year, Apple will have more supply of A5s for other devices.
None of this helps people who already own an Apple TV, however
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Malware writers will just get free ids and sign their malware. Or, the signing key will be stolen, like it always is. I'd wager that blackhats around the world are currently tendering to cartels for this contract as we speak.
Neither of these will work, because (a) the signing key is per-developer and (b) the entire point is that when your malware is found to be signed with key X, key X is revoked and your software no longer runs. That's the purpose of the system...