Don't you use a manbag Jasper? You have always struck me as a metrosexual type.
I wonder whether this sort of thing will become more prevalent in the future and therefore something to be considered when buying a phone:http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/03/04/google_android_market_peril/
The mass infections are already prompting commentary comparing Android to Microsoft Windows.
As with most things its down to the user to take responsibility for security and not expect others to do things for them.
Quote from: slack---line on March 04, 2011, 05:50:45 pm As with most things its down to the user to take responsibility for security and not expect others to do things for them.I disagree, I don't want to be responsible for anything on my phone other than paying the bill. Life's to short to be wasting time maintaining something who's principle function is to save time and effort.
If viruses on phones do become an issue then the providers are going to have to do something about it, the simplest way of doing that will be to go down the Apple route rather than the MS or Android route
Besides, its not like there haven't been viruses hitting the iOS on iPhones, worst of all it Rick-rolled you (before being adapted to be even more malicious).
I've never had a 100% reliable phone though, there have been areas of the UK where I couldn't get a signal and the battery keeps on needing to be recharged.
And Macs aren't the panacea that you're making them out to be, thats why you can take them back to Apple stores and get them repaired (and its disputable as to whether they are any better in terms of build quality anyway).
We're both saying that phones are small computers, but you're coming at it from the angle that its still more a phone than a computer, whereas I think the opposite, its a small computer I carry around in my pocket that allows me to make calls, this has always been the key selling point of "smart" phones to me as I enjoy and use the internet on the go far more than being contactable/convenience of a making phone call 24/7 (e.g. great to check the forecast for North Wales Sunday after getting rained on Saturday, despite it being a good forecast for Saturday). As such I've no problem with taking responsibility for the security of my device as and when needs arise, just as I do with all other computers I use and maintain (and more people need to take responsibility for their online life/security on home computers too).
I'm still not clear as to who out of the three possible options (Google, handset manufacturers, phone service providers) you think should be responsible or is the "interested party" here?
Clearly they all have interests in not pissing of their customers, but who out of them should take responsibility for providing AV software if/when viruses/malware become a problem?
Quote from: slack---line on March 07, 2011, 04:00:36 pmI've never had a 100% reliable phone though, there have been areas of the UK where I couldn't get a signal and the battery keeps on needing to be recharged. OK, yeah sorry, it doesn't work if it runs out of batteries. Nor if you hit it with a hammer. Or turn it off or if you try to use it on the moon. I'm sure I've not covered everything but no doubt you'll fill me in on the rest.
QuoteAnd Macs aren't the panacea that you're making them out to be, thats why you can take them back to Apple stores and get them repaired (and its disputable as to whether they are any better in terms of build quality anyway).I'm not making them out to be a panecea for anything just pointing out that even in the home computing market (which I'd suggest is different from the smart phone market) people are prepared to pay extra for hassle free slightly less hassle computing.
QuoteWe're both saying that phones are small computers, but you're coming at it from the angle that its still more a phone than a computer, whereas I think the opposite, its a small computer I carry around in my pocket that allows me to make calls, this has always been the key selling point of "smart" phones to me as I enjoy and use the internet on the go far more than being contactable/convenience of a making phone call 24/7 (e.g. great to check the forecast for North Wales Sunday after getting rained on Saturday, despite it being a good forecast for Saturday). As such I've no problem with taking responsibility for the security of my device as and when needs arise, just as I do with all other computers I use and maintain (and more people need to take responsibility for their online life/security on home computers too).You don't have a problem but I'd venture to suggest you are not a typical user. I want to be able to do all that as well but I don't want instal security software patches, new firmware etc.
QuoteI'm still not clear as to who out of the three possible options (Google, handset manufacturers, phone service providers) you think should be responsible or is the "interested party" here? I would imagine it'd be an amalgam of all of them rather than just one of them, hardware manufactures, service provides and OS manufacturers already collaborate closely
QuoteClearly they all have interests in not pissing of their customers, but who out of them should take responsibility for providing AV software if/when viruses/malware become a problem? Like I said I don't think its a case of providing AV but providing a service that doesn't need it - a bit like the iPhone . I know you said that iPhones aren't immune from viruses but I can't find an instance of a non-jailbroken phone that has been attacked (admittedly I've only done a quick Google so stand to be corrected).