Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Android leapfrogs Apple Once Again...by removing apps from phones

Chupa Chupa

Chupa Chupa

macrumors G5
Original poster
Jul 16, 2002
14,835
7,396
Saw this on Gizmodo (link).

Seems while Apple removes apps from time to time from the App Store for unpopular reasons, Google goes the next step w/ Android phones and removes the app from a users's phone. Score one for Google one-upsmanship, right Droid fans?
 
Chupa Chupa said:
Saw this on Gizmodo (link).

Seems while Apple removes apps from time to time from the App Store for unpopular reasons, Google goes the next step w/ Android phones and removes the app from a users's phone. Score one for Google one-upsmanship, right Droid fans?
Click to expand...

I read that yesterday too! What's funny is if Apple did this all of the windows and android fans would come out of the woodwork to make posts about it, yet this just slides under the radar for the most part.
 
it is to kill malicious apps and ultimately protect the user the app in question was intentionally misrepresenting itself, and not apples reason to remove an app because it contains a partial side boob, in a drawing, of a cow, in a field in russia or any other silly reason.

as long as it is not abused (and I doubt it will be) it will be of far benefit to the consumer because it actually is of benefit to the user than apples 'we dont want you to do that boo hoo wah wah' approach
 
androiphone said:
it is to kill malicious apps and ultimately protect the user the app in question was intentionally misrepresenting itself, and not apples reason to remove an app because it contains a partial side boob, in a drawing, of a cow, in a field in russia or any other silly reason.

as long as it is not abused (and I doubt it will be) it will be of far benefit to the consumer because it actually is of benefit to the user than apples 'we dont want you to do that boo hoo wah wah' approach
Click to expand...

Apple have never used their kill switch.
 
androiphone said:
it is to kill malicious apps and ultimately protect the user the app in question was intentionally misrepresenting itself, and not apples reason to remove an app because it contains a partial side boob, in a drawing, of a cow, in a field in russia or any other silly reason.

as long as it is not abused (and I doubt it will be) it will be of far benefit to the consumer because it actually is of benefit to the user than apples 'we dont want you to do that boo hoo wah wah' approach
Click to expand...

I knew I could rely on an Android fan to pop in. The fact is Apple has a similar kill switch, I don't know if I like any company with that capability. Apple makes it's choices as to what apps are allowed, if I didn't like it I would go get something else.

So who decides if an app is malicious or misrepresenting?
 
thats because apple has to approve said app before it gets to the end user which is why apple doesnt have to use the kill switch
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_0 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8A293 Safari/6531.22.7)

androiphone said:
it is to kill malicious apps and ultimately protect the user the app in question was intentionally misrepresenting itself, and not apples reason to remove an app because it contains a partial side boob, in a drawing, of a cow, in a field in russia or any other silly reason.

as long as it is not abused (and I doubt it will be) it will be of far benefit to the consumer because it actually is of benefit to the user than apples 'we dont want you to do that boo hoo wah wah' approach
Click to expand...

Malicious apps? Android should do a better job of screening and blocking those apps before they are available to consumers.
 
Hankster said:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_0 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8A293 Safari/6531.22.7)



Malicious apps? Android should do a better job of screening and blocking those apps before they are available to consumers.
Click to expand...

Why? Apps on your Mac aren't screeened before they're made available to you.
 
Revelation78 said:
I knew I could rely on an Android fan to pop in. The fact is Apple has a similar kill switch, I don't know if I like any company with that capability. Apple makes it's choices as to what apps are allowed, if I didn't like it I would go get something else.

So who decides if an app is malicious or misrepresenting?
Click to expand...

ha I'm not an android fan I'm a technology whore and can't be tied to just one (imagine the limitation)
 
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the open platform the one major
difference everyone touts about android? Inherently, isn't this the risk you take with that platform?
 
Revelation78 said:
When did the Mac get a Mac app store?


Silly comments get silly responses.....
Click to expand...

this is a silly response! any website that has a list of mac software could be classed as an app store which is what android marketplace is a list of apps that run on android :p
 
Hankster said:
Malicious apps? Android should do a better job of screening and blocking those apps before they are available to consumers.
Click to expand...

yeah just like china does with their internet, yeah win I want my life to be censored I want to be told what to do and when to do it /sarcasm
 
androiphone said:
it is to kill malicious apps and ultimately protect the user the app in question was intentionally misrepresenting itself, and not apples reason to remove an app because it contains a partial side boob, in a drawing, of a cow, in a field in russia or any other silly reason.

as long as it is not abused (and I doubt it will be) it will be of far benefit to the consumer because it actually is of benefit to the user than apples 'we dont want you to do that boo hoo wah wah' approach
Click to expand...

That is the pretext anyway.

Regardless it is unprecedented. Do you know any other company that goes into a licensed user's property and w/o their knowledge removes s/w for whatever reason? I do not. If there is a security threat they post info on the website, issue press releases, tweet it, email users, etc. to inform them of the threat. They do not just surreptitiously go into private property and remove the offending s/w.

Interesting you say "as long as it is not abused." That is an awful big key to your property you are giving a 3rd party. Personally, I would not offer up such a key. If Google is going to do this, as a "favor" to users, don't you think it should at least be "opt in" ?
 
Chupa Chupa said:
Regardless it is unprecedented. Do you know any other company that goes into a licensed user's property and w/o their knowledge removes s/w for whatever reason? I do not.
Click to expand...
Meet Amazon and the Kindle. I mean, it was a book instead of s/w, but everything else in your scenario is the same.

In a move that angered customers and generated waves of online pique, Amazon remotely deleted some digital editions of the books from the Kindle devices of readers who had bought them.
Click to expand...
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/18/technology/companies/18amazon.html
 
Chupa Chupa said:
That is the pretext anyway.

Regardless it is unprecedented. Do you know any other company that goes into a licensed user's property and w/o their knowledge removes s/w for whatever reason? I do not. If there is a security threat they post info on the website, issue press releases, tweet it, email users, etc. to inform them of the threat. They do not just surreptitiously go into private property and remove the offending s/w.

Interesting you say "as long as it is not abused." That is an awful big key to your property you are giving a 3rd party. Personally, I would not offer up such a key. If Google is going to do this, as a "favor" to users, don't you think it should at least be "opt in" ?
Click to expand...

finally a sensible answer and not just mindless fanboy remarks

but yes I agree with you I do think it is a lot of power that one company can have.

I can understand why they may need it and may have to use it as you said they could tweet and release press about it but the 'non tech savy' will likely never hear about it (as I know several people who went and bought the old iphone because they never heard about the leaked new one even though it was pretty widely reported even on the main news websites and on news channels) and likely the tech savy like us would likely have seen through the apps disguise and never have installed it in the first place but the non-tech savy would likely have just installed it and forgotten about it.

I personally think a better way and how it should be done is a pop up to the user saying something like:
"this app *name* has known malicious intents and we strongly recommend you remove it. would you like to remove it now?" and the user can then click yes or no, I would also think that it would be sensible to have this warning pop up at least 5 times or more before the user could click a 'do not remind me again' option. - and I strongly think that it SHOULD be done this way but keep the drastic option for proper emergancies, like a mobile phone botnet or something

but that kindle case mentioned I would be furious and if this method of deleting stuff remotely is abused I will be as up-in-arms as any sane person would be
 
Chupa Chupa said:
True, but Amazon profusely apologized and vowed to never do it again. Google, as of yet, is neither apologizing nor saying it will cease the practice.
Click to expand...
Just saying, it wasn't unprecedented.

iOS, Android, WebOS, and Windows Phone 7 are all confirmed to all have the "app kill/removal" ability baked-in.

AFAIK, Google's just the first company that's had to use it. They actually used it back in January for the first time, so I'm surprised that there's any kerfuffle about it now.

I have no doubt that Apple, Microsoft or Palm wouldn't hesitate to use the switch, nor apologize, if malware made it into their App Stores.
 
Let's use some common logic guys. Android has an open app store. There is no Apple/Windows Marketplace style approval or guidelines for app approval. The app made it in, was found to be malicious and removed. Google is protecting its platform and users. Would you rather have Google let the malicious app run wild?

And to think its different from the App Store policy is ludicrous. All of the apps that don't align with Apple's guidelines (which are also more strict, Microsoft's guidelines for WP7 are too) are caught at the door.

And for what its worth, Google was completely forthcoming with the details of the app kill, so whats the problem?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back