The mean and the average are the same thing. The mean of a list of numbers is the sum of the numbers divided by the number of items in the list.That's why "average" in many cases is useless - you need to look at the mean
Case and point - the highest *average* salary for a grad (bachelors degree) from UNC for a long time was History. Why? Michael Jordan - obviously the mean was much lower but his exorbitant success made the average for History majors balloon through the roof.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple's Ability to Deactivate Malicious App Store Apps
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I agree with the first portion of your argument. Apple needs play better with the developers - but as for remote disabling of applications? Not a chance - as they should have NEVER been approved for purchase. That is the problem with that - they choose to rush out the apps only to deactivate them if they failed to do their due diligence. And who decides what is 'malicious' and what it to stop Apple from disabling an application not because it is malicious but because someone made a stink about it - like the I Am Rich application. That is a GREAT marketing app and funny and poingient and ironic and satirical all in one. People complained (or so is the rumor) and Apple pulled the app without explanation. Should not the developers be informed before the app is pulled and for what reason? My argument is yes - without question.
D
Well I'm sure somewhere in there Apple has written that they can pull it and I'd say the fact that the I Am Rich application made a complete mockery of the App Store (and by extension, Apple) they were within their jurisdiction to pull it.
Well, BYE BYE PWNAGE TOOL....
Well, Pwnage Tool was fun till THIS NEWS CAME ALONG...
That means that ANY apps installed via Pwnage tool can now be DISABLED by Apple via this remote disable mechanism....
That means, that eventually Mac OS X will have this, and that means that Pwnage tool can be disabled my Mac, and Windows as well via Apple's software update....
OUCH, APPLE, OUCH!
Well, Pwnage Tool was fun till THIS NEWS CAME ALONG...
That means that ANY apps installed via Pwnage tool can now be DISABLED by Apple via this remote disable mechanism....
That means, that eventually Mac OS X will have this, and that means that Pwnage tool can be disabled my Mac, and Windows as well via Apple's software update....
OUCH, APPLE, OUCH!
Well, Pwnage Tool was fun till THIS NEWS CAME ALONG...
That means that ANY apps installed via Pwnage tool can now be DISABLED by Apple via this remote disable mechanism....
That means, that eventually Mac OS X will have this, and that means that Pwnage tool can be disabled my Mac, and Windows as well via Apple's software update....
OUCH, APPLE, OUCH!
A little paranoid? Apple only has this to disable apps that are malicious, not apps that they disagree with. Otherwise Apple would have used something like this when people started jailbreaking their phones.
Why won't they ? They brick phones. Why wait for updates and use this ability to brick 24/7 ? The irony of the 1984 commercial.
That is scary in and of itself. Who is this narc that discovered this "secret" Apple killswitch?
It's impossible to test every application for every possible scenario.
How about a flashlight app that after being installed for 1 month, starts sending spam SMS's?
How is Apple going to figure that one out in any reasonable way? Or maybe it only sends out spam SMS's on every 3rd Wednesday if your first name starts with A-F?
arn
I'm going to post the same thing I did in my comment on Engadget.
Nowhere does the hacker ever say that he has discovered the device
calling home. Nor does he say he found PROOF that the software can
actually disable the software.
This could simply be a URL that the iPhone uses to discover if an app
on your iPhone has been blacklisted, and alert you. There's no proof
the iPhone every occasionally connects to the URL on it's own, nor is
there proof that there is code built into the software to allow it to
disable apps without your consent.
This is horrible journalism that just helps spread fear or hate about a product/company. It is a rumor claiming to know something without ANY proof, and yet the article title pretty much makes it sound like it's confirmed and true.
Nowhere does the hacker ever say that he has discovered the device
calling home. Nor does he say he found PROOF that the software can
actually disable the software.
This could simply be a URL that the iPhone uses to discover if an app
on your iPhone has been blacklisted, and alert you. There's no proof
the iPhone every occasionally connects to the URL on it's own, nor is
there proof that there is code built into the software to allow it to
disable apps without your consent.
This is horrible journalism that just helps spread fear or hate about a product/company. It is a rumor claiming to know something without ANY proof, and yet the article title pretty much makes it sound like it's confirmed and true.
Require the source code for an application that is being listed, and a certification that it has passed a 100% code coverage test in a 1 hour period. There are plenty of code coverage tools out there that expose hidden code in an application. In addition to that, if a developer is using the apple SDK, then there is a license agreement which goes along with it, and Apple can push the SQA responsibilities back to the developer.
SQA has come a long way from UI only testing in the last 5 years, and there is really no excuse for all of the crap code that gets out there. Laziness, hidden code, and the desire for speed to market are the main reasons it still happens. It all comes down to lack of QA testing. Achieving 100% coverage is possible, if a developer designs their tests before they write their code. It is called test driven development, and is a huge push in the worlds of SOA and Agile Development. The biggest downfall to these is the fact that developers intrinsically hate testing the code they write. Make the developers fiscally responsible for bad code, and all that would change.
It now looks as if this might be a CoreLocation blacklist and not an application blacklist:
http://daringfireball.net/2008/08/core_location_blacklist
http://daringfireball.net/2008/08/core_location_blacklist
If true, despicable.
I hate the way Apple has been heading, and they're only getting worse with moves like this.
I hate the way Apple has been heading, and they're only getting worse with moves like this.
Which I already suggested it almost certainly was given it's location on the file system way back on page 5 or 6. It's really nothing worse that Google being able to revoke access to the maps API for webapps that break it's terms and conditions (which they can and I think have done). And no-one seems to complain about that...