Apple Orders Technicians to Feign Ignorance About Mac Malware

[stealthify]

DailyTech - Apple Accused of Ripping Off Developer's Rejected Wi-Fi Sync App

We'll see how that one plays out in court (if it even makes it there), it's a rather general concept and wasn't ideal for a third party app. Also, if you hadn't heard, Apple actually called the developer that made the wi-fi sync app and told him that they'd be interested in offering him a job.

In other news:
eWeek - Apple Hires Jailbreak Developer

DailyTech - Mac Technician Accused of Taking Naughty Photos of Women Using Spyware

And in the world of PC's:

Breitbart.tv » Peeping-Tom Technician Activates Customer’s Webcam During Support Call
Meet the Peeping Tom worm ? The Register
High-tech Peeping Tom rigged laptop webcam to snap nude pics
Hacker jailed for 18 months: Matthew Anderson spied on computer users using webcams | Mail Online
Rental Company Aaron's Inc. Allegedly Spied On PC Users Via Webcams
Digital Peeping Tom Spies on Girls Through Their Own Webcams - The Internet Patrol (Sub7 Trojan)

etc, etc.

The difference is, from what I understand, the Mac program still required users to read a dialog box and click accept, every time, in order for it to allow the use of their webcam. No security protection in the world can save people from themselves - the users are the weakest link.

[IPD]

so tossing out a job offer suddenly absconds the whole debacle? um, no. wrong is wrong. damages should be paid, imho.

p.s.
like i said, apple techs breaking the law aren't really news. any techs could be guilty of it. it's just that the type of customers that apple usually attracts are much more susceptible to shiens like this. i mean seriously, "You should fix your internal sensor soon. If unsure what to do, try putting your laptop near hot steam for several minutes to clean the sensor." that's like beyond ignorant. and some of these "victims" are college students. yikes. again, moronic customers aren't exclusive to apple--but apple certainly has more than a proportionate share of them.

[stealthify]

so tossing out a job offer suddenly absconds the whole debacle? um, no. wrong is wrong. damages should be paid, imho.

And the creator of that app is hardly the first person to come up with the idea of wireless syncing. If Apple used his code, which they likely didn't, then you'd have a reasonable argument. Until then, the only similarities I see are the general concept and the general icon (ie: a commonly used sync icon mixed with a wifi signal icon - how original).

Apple offering him a job, when they didn't particularly need to, was certainly a step in the right direction.

moronic customers aren't exclusive to apple--but apple certainly has more than a proportionate share of them.

I firmly believe that every company strives to make their products as easy to use as possible. Just because Apple succeeds at this more than any other company is no reason to hate.

[IPD]

And the creator of that app is hardly the first person to come up with the idea of wireless syncing. If Apple used his code, which they likely didn't, then you'd have a reasonable argument. Until then, the only similarities I see are the general concept and the general icon (ie: a commonly used sync icon mixed with a wifi signal icon - how original).

Apple offering him a job, when they didn't particularly need to, was certainly a step in the right direction.

originally is the litmus test? news flash! the BULK of apps are not original. even if it WAS an unoriginal idea, he still managed to get 50,000 copies sold via a 3rd party source. clearly the demand was there. apple's actions in this are clear. "wow! that's such an awesome idea, we want to do that with our stuff--but if we give this guy app rights, it's going to cost us--so let's marginalize him". not the first time apple has ripped off someone's ideas; won't be the last. you can argue semantics all you want--it still won't change the fact that apple's claim to fame is presenting existing tech in new ways. which would be fine--if they gave full credit to the inventors (or original pioneers) of that tech, rather than acting like dickholes about it.

I firmly believe that every company strives to make their products as easy to use as possible. Just because Apple succeeds at this more than any other company is no reason to hate.

negative. apple products "easy to use as possible" is a bald-faced lie. easy to use in some ways, for some uses....perhaps. universally across the board--HELL NO. i dare say though, ease of use isn't what attracts the techno-illiterate to apple; it's the perceived prestige that the apple user has.

[stealthify]

originally is the litmus test?

No. Originality (or more specifically, uniqueness) is a deciding factor in patent and copyright infringement cases. Regardless, this is stupid to argue over. Wi-fi sync isn't a new innovation, and neither the developer of the app nor Apple tried to market it that way. Plain and simple, and you'd be a fool to think that Apple didn't at least consider the idea of wi-fi syncing back when they were debating on how their mobile devices would communicate with computers. Want to know why they didn't incorporate it years ago? I have a hunch as to why; feel free to ask if you'd like to hear it. I will give you a hint, it probably has nothing to do with being dicks.

apple products "easy to use as possible" is a bald-faced lie.

Is it? On one hand Apple haters bash Mac OS X and iOS on the grounds that they're so easy and simple to use that only simpletons will want to use it, but then here you go doing an about-face and saying the opposite. Which is it, man?

[IPD]

No. Originality (or more specifically, uniqueness) is a deciding factor in patent and copyright infringement cases. Regardless, this is stupid to argue over. Wi-fi sync isn't a new innovation, and neither the developer of the app nor Apple tried to market it that way. Plain and simple, and you'd be a fool to think that Apple didn't at least consider the idea of wi-fi syncing back when they were debating on how their mobile devices would communicate with computers. Want to know why they didn't incorporate it years ago? I have a hunch as to why; feel free to ask if you'd like to hear it. I will give you a hint, it probably has nothing to do with being dicks.

simple. apple wants draconian control over its products. it won't implement something unless it feels it has force-choke grip over how it is being used. case in point: iphone bricking. again, not a new idea; just an idea that apple hadn't implemented. someone tried to offer the implementation to the community--and apple shot it down. regardless of whose idea it was first, apple didn't bring it to consumers first--so apple should--by rights--be forced to concede. you can't just prevent someone from bringing a product to market because of your own designs on "potential future use". bullshit. either get there first, or pay the dues for being a runner-up; it's that simple.

Is it? On one hand Apple haters bash Mac OS X and iOS on the grounds that they're so easy and simple to use that only simpletons will want to use it, but then here you go doing an about-face and saying the opposite. Which is it, man?

i didn't say the opposite. simpletons are who apple caters to; i.e. people whose tech demands are incredibly banal. what makes that incredibly dangerous is apple's subversion of its fallacies (virus protection, etc). so not only is the target consumer group fairly clueless about technology in the first place; apple relies & feeds upon this by not educating them. apple's scheme is to try and "simplify"--but doesn't educate. apple doesn't even have the virtue of its own version of "microsoft security essentials". oh sure, apple CLAIMS to have it, but it really doesn't. it's shoddy, difficult to understand, and unreliable. worse, since apple doesn't educate its consumers--they are pre-conditioned to click "ok" on anything and everything "official looking" that pops up onto their computers.

the cynical side of me says this is deliberate, because stupid people agreeing to install viruses/spam on their computers = more $$$ for tech support to fix apple products; but i'd like to believe apple deserves a little more credit than that. only bb's geek squad is that low (i hope).

[stealthify]

Want to know why they didn't incorporate it years ago? I have a hunch as to why; feel free to ask if you'd like to hear it.

simple. apple wants draconian control over its products. it won't implement something unless it feels it has force-choke grip over how it is being used.

Pretty much what I was going to say, kind of, just without the negative and real stick in the mud adjectives. But let me ask you a question. I have a basic idea of what you do for a living, but have you ever developed a large scale consumer product before? Simple yes or no is all I need, not a trick question, I'll tell you why I ask after you answer.

case in point: iphone bricking. again, not a new idea; just an idea that apple hadn't implemented. someone tried to offer the implementation to the community--and apple shot it down.

Bricking is a terrible thing to bring to any phone. I assume you must mean jailbreaking, or is this still in reference to the wi-fi syncing?

simpletons are who apple caters to; i.e. people whose tech demands are incredibly banal.

First part I agree with (at least who they primarily advertise to), but not so much with the latter half. My definition of simpletons are people that don't care how things work, but rather that they just want things to work - no questions asked. Perhaps this is just semantics again, but there's absolutely no reason to confuse 'ease of use' with 'lack of technical capability'. This is how I can tell you don't use a Mac these days.

So what, exactly, is it that you don't think a modern Macs are capable of these days?

what makes that incredibly dangerous is apple's subversion of its fallacies (virus protection, etc). so not only is the target consumer group fairly clueless about technology in the first place;

Yes, this is a volatile mix. Your point about education (below) reinforces that the users are the weakest link - on any platform - and always will be...

apple's scheme is to try and "simplify"--but doesn't educate ... they are pre-conditioned to click "ok" on anything and everything "official looking" that pops up onto their computers.

... and education would be cool, if people wanted to hear it. Anything beyond a 2-3 sentence explanation seems to be the truest form of repellent of anyone that comes to me with a technical question, but maybe people don't want a college education or 1-2 years of experience under their belt in order to figure out how to operate their computer. Let's not kid ourselves: this is the audience both Apple and Microsoft are after, but by your own admission it is clear Apple is doing a better job at it.

However, the pre-conditioned 'clicking ok' on everything is something that has plagued Windows users for years. If not, how is it that these viruses are so rampant?

[IPD]

Pretty much what I was going to say, kind of, just without the negative and real stick in the mud adjectives. But let me ask you a question. I have a basic idea of what you do for a living, but have you ever developed a large scale consumer product before? Simple yes or no is all I need, not a trick question, I'll tell you why I ask after you answer.

no. and neither have 75% of those who have smartphone aps on the market. just because someone has designs on an idea/product--and get beaten to the punch--doesn't mean that they can reneg & not have to pay the piper.

Bricking is a terrible thing to bring to any phone. I assume you must mean jailbreaking, or is this still in reference to the wi-fi syncing?

bricking is what apple has done--on numerous occasions--to those who have jailbroken their phones. this is no different than dell bricking your desktop because you decided to erase windows and install linux instead. it's outrageous, it's a crime, and it's acceptable--only according to the sheeple...and apple.

First part I agree with (at least who they primarily advertise to), but not so much with the latter half. My definition of simpletons are people that don't care how things work, but rather that they just want things to work - no questions asked. Perhaps this is just semantics again, but there's absolutely no reason to confuse 'ease of use' with 'lack of technical capability'. This is how I can tell you don't use a Mac these days.

i'm not confusing them. they're distinct entities--though there is some collusion. i haven't used a mac since checking my email on unix in college. i've already shared all of that. i would rather get gang raped by justin bieber & dirty mike and the boys--in a prius--while being forced to watch twilight over and over--than buy an apple product.

So what, exactly, is it that you don't think a modern Macs are capable of these days?

the "magic" that its users seem to ascribe to it. a good excuse why they cost $500 more than competing pc's (read: that's not BS marketing hype). native support for PC games or PC software without the use of emulation/dual-boot software. (and seriously, if it's so "consumer friendly" why does the consumer have to go through so many more hurdles to run software that runs natively on windows? and how exactly do you run "windows live" on a mac...if you're a tech-newbie?)

Yes, this is a volatile mix. Your point about education (below) reinforces that the users are the weakest link - on any platform - and always will be...... and education would be cool, if people wanted to hear it. Anything beyond a 2-3 sentence explanation seems to be the truest form of repellent of anyone that comes to me with a technical question, but maybe people don't want a college education or 1-2 years of experience under their belt in order to figure out how to operate their computer. Let's not kid ourselves: this is the audience both Apple and Microsoft are after, but by your own admission it is clear Apple is doing a better job at it.

apple IS doing a better job of it. not for trying though. the same group of people who wallow in uneducated bliss are the same people who buy shit because "it's so shiny!". seriously, advertising that macs come with "spinners" would generate just as much crowd response as announcing that they have new CPU's. MS isn't after nincompoops--they want everyone. apple, on the other hand, doesn't seem to care. it almost would appear that apple thinks the educated consumer is the enemy.

and oh yeah, a college education (4-year degree) is worth less than the shit i took last week. so yes, if you can't figure out a computer--as a college student or graduate--i'm hardly surprised. it's no longer "in fashion" to be an educated consumer. the only reason people re-evaluate that behavior is when the economy takes a crap & budgets start becoming shoestring.

However, the pre-conditioned 'clicking ok' on everything is something that has plagued Windows users for years. If not, how is it that these viruses are so rampant?

now that's just beyone naive. windows viruses are so rampant because....let's see....

Usage share of operating systems - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

oh look. windows has 90 FREAKING % of the market! nah...that can't possibly be why so many viruses target windows--regardless of user competence. and "clicking on everything" isn't what plagues windows. in fact, most of the pop-ups that generate said "clicky things" are caused by malware ALREADY INSTALLED on the system. random ads for "spyware blocker software" result from deficiencies in internet-security-suite software in the first place.

better still...until recently, MS never even once insinuated that its users would be "safe and secure" just from using windows. (i'm still not sure that it has come out and overtly said that since it created security essentials). apple, on the other hand, gives you the "shit in a box with a guarantee on the side". now i could stick my head up a bulls ass to get a look at a t-bone steak...but i'll take the butcher's word for it.

[stealthify]

have you ever developed a large scale consumer product before?

no.

Don't worry, neither have I. But let us speculate for a moment, shall we? Your are a behemoth of a software and hardware development company and you have a product to offer but you must make an important decision on the route you will go. When choosing to offer your software open or closed, you are faced with the cold hard fact that this decision could potentially cost you far more in support than it does to actually create the software you intend to offer. You are in charge of providing your own technical support and you must do it with as much grace as possible in order to keep your clientele from jumping ship in a rather competitive market.

This may seem like business-theory rambling, but consider the implications. Everyone is in the business of making money, Google - Microsoft - Apple, and decisions like this do not come easy to all. It came easy to Google... who offers their tech support? Not them. Who do you call if you have a problem with your Android device? Your carrier, or HTC/Motorola, etc. Where is Google when you want to call them to get some official Android support? Gone... like the wind.

This doesn't seem like a plausible option for Apple. Put yourself in their shoes, and consider it from the perspective of a company interested in staying afloat. Do you want to toss all your company's money out the door providing tech support to some old lady that nonchalantly side-loaded a shady app and before she knew it her phone had become malware infested, was overheating, and shedding battery life faster than she could charge it? Sounds like more trouble than it's worth. But hey, you don't have to take my word for it, listen to what Motorola's CEO had to say about it:

"Seventy per cent of devices are coming back because they have downloaded a third-party application, and the effect that has on performance is vast"

Source: Motorola CEO Disses Open Android, Bad Apps Hinder Performance - Sanjay Jha - Zimbio

This is the sole reason I can't fault Apple on their decision to not open iOS like Android, or to open Mac OS X like Linux. And on that note, who provides official Linux support? Ah... no one.

I know I can't change your thinking on why Apple likely does the things it does, but I challenge you to think outside the box and really consider why Apple has had to make some paths more difficult (yet not impossible, mind you) to reach than others.

tl;dr: It would be absolutely impossible, financially, for Apple to open its systems and still offer the same caliber of technical support that their consumers have become accustom to. It would create more problems than it would solve, and they would be left with having to pick up the pieces. With Apple's current structure, it would be nothing short of company suicide.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is all I had interest in writing tonight, but while I'm here let me just point out a few more of your misguided 'facts':

bricking is what apple has done--on numerous occasions--to those who have jailbroken their phones.

False. Apple users have bricked their own phone by using buggy jailbreaking methods and/or shoddy apps from Cydia, etc.

the "magic" that its users seem to ascribe to it.

You'll be happy to know that Apple did not use the word 'magic' a single time in their latest convention at WWDC. No mention of unicorns, leprechauns or the Easter bunny were to be found, either.

a good excuse why they cost $500 more than competing pc's

13.3in Intel i5 2.30ghz Sony Vaio - $1349.99
13in Intel i5 2.30ghz Macbook Pro - $1199.00

native support for PC games or PC software without the use of emulation/dual-boot software. (and seriously, if it's so "consumer friendly" why does the consumer have to go through so many more hurdles to run software that runs natively on windows?

The simple answer is that they don't. Read: Boot Camp Assistant. It is literally a three step process to get up and running on Windows.

it almost would appear that apple thinks the educated consumer is the enemy.

Find me a quote where Apple is directly aiming to scare advanced consumers from their computers. You won't find one. I am more inclined to say Apple gives educated consumers the benefit of the doubt and doesn't feel the need to spend millions of dollars marketing to them. Think about it, do educated consumers really need to be advertised to? If they needed a commercial to tell them what to buy, something tells me they're probably not all that educated.

oh look. windows has 90 FREAKING % of the market! nah...that can't possibly be why so many viruses target windows

Well that makes plenty of sense, obviously, until you apply it to another operating system market... say - smartphones?

Android vs. iPhone and iPad by the numbers - Computerworld

How many times have you heard of an iOS device getting some type of devastating malware? Now, how many have you heard about it on Android?

Your argument just shat itself.

better still...until recently, MS never even once insinuated that its users would be "safe and secure" just from using windows.

And Apple never insinuated that either. Go back and re-watch that Apple commercial (you know, the one where Mac guy is making fun of the sick PC guy). The statement was that Mac OS X, at the moment, is more safe (in the numbers game) and less likely to get a virus than Windows - and that, sir, is not a lie.

[IPD]

tl;dr: It would be absolutely impossible, financially, for Apple to open its systems and still offer the same caliber of technical support that their consumers have become accustom to. It would create more problems than it would solve, and they would be left with having to pick up the pieces. With Apple's current structure, it would be nothing short of company suicide.

apple's "great customer support" is still a myth. i'm honestly surprised that tech support doesn't pull out bones, tarot cards, and a crystal ball when they have to work on apple shiz. it's not great customer support. it's, "pay us the $$$ we tell you to, and we'll make the problem go away for you." again, i don't think it's overtly bad...just a by product of owning a company that DELIBERATELY caters to technophobes and nincompoops--and doesn't care or desire to educate them.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is all I had interest in writing tonight, but while I'm here let me just point out a few more of your misguided 'facts':

False. Apple users have bricked their own phone by using buggy jailbreaking methods and/or shoddy apps from Cydia, etc.

great. so apple isn't malicious, just bloody incompetant. really helping your case out here, bub. and no, bricking isn't isolated to one refresh or one particular phone. and at least once it was proven to be isolated to just jailbroken phones.

You'll be happy to know that Apple did not use the word 'magic' a single time in their latest convention at WWDC. No mention of unicorns, leprechauns or the Easter bunny were to be found, either.

semantics. i call it magic because that's what it is. apple calls it "proprietary circuitry", "integrated enhancements" and a whole bunch of other muckety-muck that doesn't mean anything except sound impressive. it's like watching a goddamn episode of star trek TNG. quasi-pseudo-scientific-late-20th-century-tech-sounding-words. oooooooh.....spooky!!!!!!!!!!!!

13.3in Intel i5 2.30ghz Sony Vaio - $1349.99
13in Intel i5 2.30ghz Macbook Pro - $1199.00

Newegg.com - TOSHIBA Satellite L635-S3104 NoteBook Intel Core i5 480M(2.66GHz) 13.3" 4GB Memory DDR3 1066 640GB HDD 5400rpm DVD Super Multi Intel HD Graphics
Newegg.com - HP ProBook 6360b (XU055UT#ABA) Notebook Intel Core i5 2410M(2.30GHz) 13.3" 4GB Memory DDR3 1333 320GB HDD 7200rpm DVD Super Multi Intel HD Graphics 3000

oh sure, if you search, you can find 1 or 2 pc's selling for MORE than apple's crap--but you must REALLY be an idiot if you buy them. hell, i can get a 15.6" MSI gaming laptop for practically the same cost as that sony.

trust me, you can post up any apple PC/laptop/airbook/macpos & i can find an equivalent system for much less; and the contrast only gets worse the higher up the food chain you go.

The simple answer is that they don't. Read: Boot Camp Assistant. It is literally a three step process to get up and running on Windows

.

that's three more steps than i have to take. not to mention that the consumer STILL has to track down drivers, patches and any other quirky problems which the program may have natively. but just for the benefit of the doubt, let's assume that mac can "code-wise" handle games just as well as windows (which i know for a FACT that it can't). that being the case...who games on a mac? have you ever seen a south korean playing starcraft on one? how about fati1ity kicking some FPS ass? hell, has ANYONE ever seriously tried gaming on a mac? no? well...i guess that really says something, now doesn't it?

Find me a quote where Apple is directly aiming to scare advanced consumers from their computers. You won't find one. I am more inclined to say Apple gives educated consumers the benefit of the doubt and doesn't feel the need to spend millions of dollars marketing to them. Think about it, do educated consumers really need to be advertised to? If they needed a commercial to tell them what to buy, something tells me they're probably not all that educated.

trick question. the only "educated" consumers apple has are those that never rely on apple tech support. they're also likely those stuck with using apple products for work-related reasons. besides, apple doesn't need to scare away the users who learn. it's developed a virtual black-hole of apple apps and interconnectedness that anyone who tries to pull away finds it impossible to do so. (and those who do find that they're out of $$$ that they spent on itunes, istore, etc).

it's a self-perpetuating cash-cow. an ingenious design, but still diabolical.

Well that makes plenty of sense, obviously, until you apply it to another operating system market... say - smartphones?

Android vs. iPhone and iPad by the numbers - Computerworld

How many times have you heard of an iOS device getting some type of devastating malware? Now, how many have you heard about it on Android?

Your argument just shat itself.

about equal amounts of malware, actually. surprising, really, considering the death-choke that jobs has on the iphone. so even if you can presuppose that draconian control is what is keeping the viruses at bay--do you REALLY want to be forced to sacrifice your user liberty just so that you can "be protected"? if that's the cause, why are you online at all? unplug from the damn internet so you can't get hacked---PERIOD.

personally, i DON'T like being told what i can and can't do with my own stuff. i have anti-virus to guard against bad shit from happening to my PC. apple's solution has nothing to do with safeguards; it just wants to throttle everything to the point it can monitor everything. f-that.

as "problematic" as you seem to think android is, mark my words. android will have a VASTLY superior virus-protection offering to anything ios will have. why? because of exposure. android, like it or not, will be exposed to much more--because of its nature. this gives it a HUGE leg up on anti-virus efforts. and when the time comes (if it does) to upgrade to a smartphone, it'll be meego, android, or winmo. it will NOT be with a company that has a black hole to keep consumers from leaving, and an anti-virus posture that's a combination of "security through obscurity" and "big brother is watching you".

And Apple never insinuated that either. Go back and re-watch that Apple commercial (you know, the one where Mac guy is making fun of the sick PC guy). The statement was that Mac OS X, at the moment, is more safe (in the numbers game) and less likely to get a virus than Windows - and that, sir, is not a lie.

less likely to get a virus? maybe if you ran both windows and a mac without ANY antivirus whatsoever. yet mac viruses are much more likely to cause MASSIVE damage...because the OS hasn't been exploited to the ends of the earth like windows. what can get hacked WILL get hacked--and on a mac, that will likely have devastating results.

now as an educated consumer, i understand this. the sheeple, however, do not. and that's what makes apple's claims not only heinous; it makes them downright evil.