Apple Responds to YiSpecter Malware, Says Fix Was Implemented in iOS 8.4

[tbrinkma]

Apple has terrible update policy. Microsoft still supports Windows XP which is 12 years old and widely used out there. Apple should learn something from that, allow customers to downgrade to every compatible OS and provide security and bugfixes to every OS they made in last 20 years. That would be customer care.

Microsoft still supports* Windows XP because their replacement OS (Vista) was 7 *years* late being released, and had serious enough issues that Microsoft's primary customers (corporations) avoided it like the plague. Had XP support ended on Microsoft's normal timeline, it would have been unsupported several years before Vista was even released.

* In reality, Windows XP support ended about a year and a half ago (April 8th, 2014).[1]
[1] https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/WindowsForBusiness/end-of-xp-support

Bottom line: I wouldn't recommend buying Apple product to anyone who wants to make a long-term investment. And I would advice against upgrading OS to the next version, because it'll render device less usable than it was before the update.

Apple has the longest hardware support of any vendor in the smartphone market. Who would you suggest instead?
(Google's Nexus line of Android phones are the only ones that come *close* to support duration.)

 

[Max(IT)]

You either completely missed or ignored the point that the official AppStore was compromised.

Processes and procedures mate, that apple own.

Thank god there are no lazy Europeans eh...... are you kidding me lol...

That kind of "malware" isn't easily identified. Do you think Apple could examine every single line of code in any app submitted.
Apple gave secure development tools and a sandboxed approach. They examine the content of submitted apps, but surely not every line of its code.
The only thing Apple could have done better was to sign Xcode software to avoid hacked versions.
I think they learned the lesson.

That was a factual statement about a single event...not "Meanwhile, Android and Windows Phones continue to do bad things similarly".

I would never say that about you, was just showing the ridiculousness of judging a person by a statement you disagree with then dismissing their opinion.

I wasn't judging you by any means...

 

[v04bvs]

Two different business models: Legacy code is important to corporate IT, but it stifles innovation. Microsoft can't be nimble because it makes its money selling to IT. Apple doesn't have to worry about that.

Backporting bug fixes does not stifle innovation. It's very minimal work.

Microsoft still supports* Windows XP because their replacement OS (Vista) was 7 *years* late being released, and had serious enough issues that Microsoft's primary customers (corporations) avoided it like the plague. Had XP support ended on Microsoft's normal timeline, it would have been unsupported several years before Vista was even released.

* In reality, Windows XP support ended about a year and a half ago (April 8th, 2014).[1]
[1] https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/WindowsForBusiness/end-of-xp-support

There are editions which are still supported (embedded, which is almost the same as normal edition). Even if we are talking about 2014, that's good support.

Apple has the longest hardware support of any vendor in the smartphone market. Who would you suggest instead?
(Google's Nexus line of Android phones are the only ones that come *close* to support duration.)

I don't consider this as hardware support. Every OS update makes device more unusable. My iPad 3 gone from lightning fast on iOS 6 to terrible slow with few seconds pauses here and there, lagging animations on iOS 9. And with a lot of cut features. Apple is doing this to show pretty numbers and statistics on their annual conferences. They have pretty numbers and users have unusable hardware, without the ability to return back to the software that worked for them. I would be much happier, if they didn't support old devices, but instead just provided security updates to existing OSes, so I can use them without fear of being hacked.

 

[deviant]

Unfortunately yes they can, and have done. They will continue to do, and the pace will only increase in speed. Do you really believe the "New every 12" plan is simply to make the process easier for people? It's only a short amount of time before your iPhone is good for 2 yrs tops.

I know, i'm just a hopeless romantic

 

[MH01]

That kind of "malware" isn't easily identified. Do you think Apple could examine every single line of code in any app submitted.
Apple gave secure development tools and a sandboxed approach. They examine the content of submitted apps, but surely not every line of its code.
The only thing Apple could have done better was to sign Xcode software to avoid hacked versions.
I think they learned the lesson.

This is just development 101, nothing new here. The part that I find amusing is that certain folk on here are downplaying the issue as though the apple AppStore was not hacked cause it was the Chinese one, like its second rate, and like the Wild West.

That is my issue. The official AppStore was hacked. Plenty of lazy devs in Europe and us also mate ! Careful with stereotyping .

 

[Infrared]

What ever the case maybe, at the end of the life style they were selling it a discounted price and customers knew that they were getting an out of date cut price phone with a limited lifespan. It is difficult to feel sorry for people who voluntarily go out of their way to purchase a cut price phone the are surprised that their support period isn't very long.

We are talking about people in, e.g., India.

 

[cwt1nospam]

Backporting bug fixes does not stifle innovation. It's very minimal work.

LOL! Everyone does that! What Microsoft does (and needs to do because of its business model) is maintain code that's been obsolete for, in some cases, decades. In the MS world, for example, there is still a lot of 32 bit code. Hell, there's still a fair amount of 16 bit code, complete with memory leaks, buffer overruns, and other security issues. This happened because MS maintained (or continues to maintain) that code for much longer than Apple would have, had they ever had a 16 bit version (even System 1.0 was 24 bit!) of OS X. Microsoft had to do this, since many of their corporate customers would have been pissed enough to dump them if they hadn't. That code now prevents many PC users from upgrading, which is why the adoption rates for newer versions of Windows are so much lower than for the Mac.

When you're stuck supporting legacy code it's hard to push the envelope. It's why MS has been so slow to respond to developments like the iPod, iPhone, and iPad. Their only hope now is that they can develop the Surface to the point where its good enough to gain enough support from IT departments that it can compete with the iPad and/or MacBook. As IT"s influence on overall sales wains, that's looking less and less likely, even if the Surface surpasses the iPad in technical capabilities. This is because Apple has been able to develop a new ecosystem that the Surface won't be compatible with, while MS was busy protecting its obsolete ecosystem: Windows in the enterprise.

 

[snowmoon]

Everyone does that

Except Apple. They do not officially support any previous release of their operating systems after a new major release. They have often abandoned users in limbo by deprecating software and then leaving uses vulnerable to bugs by releasing a new system and not back porting fixes.

Apple needs to understand that if they want to be taken seriously in business they need to have something resembling a reasonable support structure which includes long(er) term support for OS releases. I personally know a director of IT for a K-12 district and the stories of how badly Apple is screwing them would make you cringe. He really has been converted over the past 8 years from an apple die-hard to having more chromebooks than Apple desktops.

 

[cwt1nospam]

Except Apple. They do not officially support any previous release of their operating systems after a new major release. They have often abandoned users in limbo by deprecating software and then leaving uses vulnerable to bugs by releasing a new system and not back porting fixes.

Are you deliberately misunderstanding me? Yes, Apple does it, just not to the degree you'd like, thankfully. It's not their fault that some businesses can't (or refuse to) keep up with technology, and I for one hope they never go chasing after that market. If/when they do, they'll end up like PC makers, suffering with low margins selling commodity products.

There comes a time when old technology should be abandoned, and if some people insist on sticking with obsolete hardware then they need to accept the risks for doing so.